- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:757 WP No. 3651 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 3651 OF 2023 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MISS NAVYA P ACHARYA D/O PARAMESHWARA ACHARYA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, D NO.1-92, ACHARYA COMPOUND, GUDDE ANGAI POST, UDYAVARA UDUPI-574118 …PETITIONER (BY MISS. SWATI.G.HEGDE., FOR SRI. H. PAVANA CHANDRA SHETTY., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DIRECTOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, V V TOWER, BENGALURU-560001. 2. MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER UDUPI CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL UDUPI-576101. 3. ENVIRONMENT ENGINEER UDUPI CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL UDUPI-576101 4. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER UDUPI CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL UDUPI-576101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL CARIAPPA., AGA FOR R-1; SRI. T.I.ABDULLA., ADVOCATE FOR R-2 & R-3; R-4 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:757 WP No. 3651 of 2023 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE R-3 ENVIRONMENT ENGINEER DATED. 02.02.2023 BEARING ITS NO. UNaSa.HLH2.CR.758/2022-23 THEREBY DEMANDING RS. 25,000/- FOR CAUSING ENVIRONMENT POLLUTION BY THROWING THE GARBAGE AT PUBLIC ROAD PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner is calling in question the demand notice by which she has been called upon to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/-. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that said notice is based on a model byelaw which is yet to be adopted by the Municipality and approved by the Government and therefore, the impugned demand notice cannot be sustained. 2. Sri T.I.Abdulla, learned counsel appearing for the Municipality does not dispute the fact that the model - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:757 WP No. 3651 of 2023 byelaw is yet to be adopted and approved by the Government. 3. It is, therefore, clear that the impugned demand notice is without jurisdiction and consequently, it is quashed. Liberty is reserved to the Municipality to initiate proceedings after the model byelaw is adopted and approved by the Government if the Municipality finds that it is entitled to do so because the petitioner has violated the Bye law after the Bye laws have come in to force. 4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE PKS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 67