- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19965 WP No. 7567 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 7567 OF 2024 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: JAI BHARATHI SAMRUDHI SAMSTHE (R) NO. 13, SHIVAJI ROAD BEHIND GANESHA TEMPLE N R MOHALLA MYSORE - 570007. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SMT. K.M. TULASI W/O ANAND .S NO. 521, MURUGADEVI ROAD 2ND CROSS NAZARBAD MOHALLA MYKSORE - 570010. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRIDHAR .A.G, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTEMNT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI M S BUILDING BANGALORE - 560001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER MYSORU MAHANAGARA PALIKE MYSORE - 570024. …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19965 WP No. 7567 of 2024 (BY SRI. BOPANNA .B, AGA FOR R1; SRI. PALLAVA .R, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R2 TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONER'S REPRESENTATION AT ANNEXURE-F DATED 23/12/2023 AND FURTHER BY DIRECTING THE R2 TO RELEASE THE ARREARS OF BILL FOR THE PERIOD OF 8 MONTHS TO THE TUNE OF RS. 7,59,792/- IMMEDIATELY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus, alleging inaction on the part of respondent No.2. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite submission of a detailed representation dated 23.12.2023, respondent No.2 has failed to take any action thereon. The petitioner further seeks a direction to respondent No.2 to release the arrears of unpaid bills which have been withheld for over eight months, amounting to a total sum of Rs.7,59,792/-. The petitioner contends that the said amount is legitimately due to him for the services rendered under a validly awarded contract. 2. The petitioner, a registered contractor, states that he was entrusted with the responsibility of maintaining “Zero” - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19965 WP No. 7567 of 2024 Solid Waste management in Ward Nos.34 to 37, pursuant to a work order issued by respondent No.2 (Palike). In compliance with the terms of the work order, the petitioner asserts that he engaged a team of workers on a monthly wage basis and diligently discharged the contractual obligations assigned to him by the Palike. The principal grievance now raised is that respondent No.2 has unilaterally terminated the work order with effect from 31.10.2020, without assigning any reasons and without affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. The petitioner contends that such termination is arbitrary and in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, and that he was left with no other remedy but to file a civil suit in O.S.No.868/2020 challenging the said termination. 3. The petitioner further submits that during the pendency of the said suit, the officers of respondent No.2 assured him that his pending bills would be settled, and on the strength of this assurance, the petitioner was persuaded to withdraw the suit. However, despite such withdrawal, respondent No.2 has failed to honour its commitment and has neither released the payment of arrears nor responded to the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19965 WP No. 7567 of 2024 petitioner’s representation, thereby compelling him to approach this Court seeking redress. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 (Palike) opposes the writ petition and disputes the factual assertions made by the petitioner. It is contended that the petitioner is not entitled to any amount as claimed and that the contract was lawfully terminated in accordance with the terms and conditions governing the agreement. 5. Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and on a careful perusal of the records, this Court is of the considered view that the action or rather, the inaction on the part of respondent No.2 warrants interference. Admittedly, the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 23.12.2023, which remains unattended and unanswered to date. In the absence of a response, either accepting or rejecting the petitioner’s claim with reasons, respondent No.2 cannot remain silent or evasive. If respondent No.2 was of the view that the petitioner’s claim was untenable, it was incumbent upon the said authority to issue a reasoned endorsement rejecting the claim, which has not been done in the instant case. The failure - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19965 WP No. 7567 of 2024 to decide on the representation, especially when financial claims are involved, is arbitrary and unreasonable. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case where a writ of mandamus ought to be issued, directing respondent No.2 to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s representation in a time-bound manner, in accordance with law. 6. For the reasons stated supra, this Court proceeds go pass the following: ORDER (i) Writ petition is allowed. (ii) Respondent No.2/Palike is hereby directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 23.12.2023 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 62