- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:6219 WP No. 3553 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 3553 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SHESHAPPA RAI S/O NARAYAN RAI AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS PENSION LANE, MDIKERI TOWN MADIKERI TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT-571 201. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VINOD KUMAR M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, MULTY STORY BUILDING DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MADIKERI FORT MADIKERI-571 201. 3. THE CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL MADIKERI, KODAGU DISTRICT-571 201 BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL CARIAPPA, AGA FOR R1 & R2; Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6219 WP No. 3553 of 2025 SRI. PRATHEEP K C, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-3 TO EXTEND THE TENDER PERIOD FOR ANOTHER ONE YEAR BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 20.01.2025 PRODUCED AT ANNX-C. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking for a direction to the 3rd respondent to extend the contractual period for a further period of one year, as requested by him in his representation at Annexure - C. 2. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was granted a contract and was permitted to collect parking charges from 30.03.2023 for a period of one year. This period was extended pursuant to the decision of the council by a period of one year i.e., till 15.02.2025. The petitioner has therefore no - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6219 WP No. 3553 of 2025 contractual right to collect the parking charges after 15.02.2025. 3. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, there was a landslide and certain construction materials were dumped in the parking area allotted to him and, therefore, he has suffered a loss. 4. There is nothing on record about any such landslide prior to an Annexure – C, which was submitted just before the expiry of the license period. If there is nothing on record to indicate that the petitioner was unable to collect parking charges from the area allotted to him, for the reason stated by the petitioner, it would not be possible to accept a representation which is given just before the expiry of the license period and direct the respondents to renew the license. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:6219 WP No. 3553 of 2025 5. There is no merit in this petition, therefore this petition is dismissed. 6. In view of the disposal of the petition, all pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE GSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5