- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3869 WP No. 3268 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 3268 OF 2017 (GM-R/C) BETWEEN: SRI. VARADARAJASWAMY TEMPLE SEVA SAMITHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, N.R.KRISHNAMURTHY, S/O. LATE RANGACHAR, AGED ABOUT 86 YEARS, FORT, CHANNAPATNA, RAMANAGAR DISTRICT-571 501. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. JANARDHANA.G., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA MINISTRY OF REVENUE, MULTI-STOREYED BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, HINDU RELIGIOUS AND ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, 2ND FLOOR, MAHADESHWARA VARTHA BHAVAN, ALUR VENKATARAO ROAD, CHAMARAJPET, BENGALURU-560 018. 3. THE TAHASILDAR AND MUZARAI OFFICER, CHANNAPATNA TALUK, CHANNAPATNA-571 501, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT. Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3869 WP No. 3268 of 2017 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT, RAMANAGARA - 571 511. 5. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, RAMANAGARAM SUB DIVISION, RAMANAGARA, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT- 571 511. 6. SMT. GOWRAMMA HINDU, AGE: MAJOR, W/O. SRI. SHIVANNA, TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCILLOR, CHANNAPATNA TOWN MUNICIPALITY, CHANNAPATNA-571 501, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH.SHETTAR., AGA FOR R1 TO 5; SRI. S.R.HEGDE., ADVOCATE FOR R6) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Janardhana.G., counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Mahantesh Shettar, AGA for respondents 1 to 5 have appeared in person. 2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 1 to 5 to evict the sixth - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3869 WP No. 3268 of 2017 respondent from the encroached portion in terms of the report given by the fourth respondent under Annexure-C in No.DVS (2) CR 104/15-16 dated 30.03.2016 or in the alternative if it is not found feasible direct the first respondent to accept the proposal made by the fourth respondent to recover the market value of the encroached portion by the sixth respondent of the petitioner's property. 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. 4. Suffice it to note that this Court on an earlier occasion disposed of the matter and directed the Assistant Commissioner to hold appropriate spot inspection, determine the facts as to whether there is an encroachment or not. After the remand, it was found that a portion of the property was encroached by Smt.Gowramma - sixth respondent. However, the Assistant Commissioner suggested to collect the market value of the encroached portion. Hence, he sought permission from the Endowment Commissioner for accepting the same. The Endowment Commissioner taking note of the order passed - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:3869 WP No. 3268 of 2017 by this Court in W.P.No.34227/2009 directed the Assistant Commissioner to complete the inquiry about encroachment. In my view, the Endowment Commissioner is justified in directing the Assistant Commissioner to abide by the order passed by this Court. 5. AGA on instruction submits that the Government would abide by the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.34227/2009 vide Annexure-B and would complete the process at the earliest. 6. On facts and in all circumstances of the case, this Court deems it proper to issue a mandamus. A Mandamus is ordered directing respondents 1 to 5 to abide the order dated 09.01.2014 passed by this Court in W.P.No.34227/2009, within the outer limit of six months in accordance with the law. 7. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 3 Sl No.: 17