- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5440 WP No. 19972 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 19972 OF 2019 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI NARASHIME GOWDA S/O SINGREGOWDA SINCE DECEASED REP. BY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE 1(A) SRI. CHELUVARAJU S/O LATE NARASHIME GOWDA AGED MAJOR, R/AT NO.3, 3RD CROSS, KUMBARA KOPALU MAIN ROAD, MYSURU 570028. 2. SRI DORESWAMY GOWDA S/O LATE ANAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS 3. SRI NAGESH S/O DORESWAMY GOWDA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS 4. SRI DEVAPPA S/O DORESWAMY GOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS 5. SMT JAYALAXMI D/O DORESWAMY GOWDA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 6. SMT SHESHAMMA D/O DORESWAMY GOWDA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5440 WP No. 19972 of 2019 7. SRI SHIVAKUMAR D S/O DORESWAMY GOWDA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS PETITIONERS 2 TO 7 ARE RESIDING AT NO 395, NIGAIAHANAGERE BEEDI KUMARA KOPALU MYSURU - 570016 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. R.S. RAVI, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. D.V. GOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT VIKASA SOUDHA, DR B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560001 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY 2. MYSURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE NEW SAYAJI RAO ROAD, MYSURU –570 001 REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BOPANNA BELLIAPPA, AGA FOR R1 SRI. PALLAVA R., ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT TO THE RESPONDENTS TO IMPLEMENT ITS RESOLUTION DTD.1.5.1988 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-B AND ALSO TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DTD.21.6.2014 AND 3.8.2014 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-E AND E1 MADE BY THE PETITIONERS, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS SITES ARE CONCERNED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5440 WP No. 19972 of 2019 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER This petition is filed directing the respondents to implement the resolution passed on 31.05.1988, a copy of which is produced at Annexure-B, by considering the representation of the petitioners dated 21.06.2014 and 05.08.2014, produced at Annexure-E and Annexure-E1. 2. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioners points out that the Corporation had passed the resolution, and, as a matter of fact, in similarly situated cases, the Corporation has implemented the resolution in case of certain people, as could be seen from Annexure-H1 and Annexure-H2. 3. In my view, since there is a resolution, and as the case of the petitioners is that this resolution is implemented in respect of certain individuals, but not in respect of the petitioners, it would be appropriate to direct - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5440 WP No. 19972 of 2019 the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners and pass appropriate orders. 4. In this regard, the writ petition is disposed of. 5. The petitioners are permitted to give a fresh representation highlighting their entitlement under the resolution within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE sks