- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2710 WP No. 13496 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 13496 OF 2020 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI AKSHAY KUMAR S/O. HARI SHANKAR JHA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT FLAT NO. G1, A-BLOCK, SAI SRINIVASA ENCLAVE, DODDATHOGUR, ELECTRONIC CITY PHASE-1, BENGALURU-560 100. 2. SRI. PRAHALADA RAM S/O. VAGA RAMJI, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, LAXMI VEKATESHWARA NILAYA, APC CIRCLE, JIGANI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU. 3. SRI. NAGAPAL PRAVEEN KUMAR S/O. JEEVANDAS, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, KAGGADASAPURA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU. 4. SMT. SEEP WADHA W/O. HUNNY GROVER, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/AT NO. GODREJ E CITY, M-302, ELECTRONIC CITY PHASE-1, BENGALURU-560 100. Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2710 WP No. 13496 of 2020 5. SRI. K HAREENDRAN S/O. P K GOVINDAN, AGED ABOUT … YEARS, R/AT 'SADGAMAYA', THIRUVANGAD, THALASEERY, KANNUR DISTRICT, KERALA. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. UDAYA PRAKASH.M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. DISTRICT COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, BENGALURU-560 009. 3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU SOUTH SUB DIVISION, BENGALURU, KANDAYA BHAVAN, KG ROAD, BENGALURU-560 009. 4. TAHSILDAR BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, KANDYA BHAVAN, K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560 009. 5. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, ELECTRONIC CITY SUB DIVISION, BENGALURU SOUTH EAST, BENGALURU CITY-560 100. 6. POLICE INSPECTOR ELECTRONIC CITY POLICE STATION, BENGALURU-560 100. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2710 WP No. 13496 of 2020 7. MRS. JAYAMMA W/O. SRI. MAREGOWDA, FLAT NO. 3184, SHOBHA APARTMENTS, THALAGATTA PURA, BENGALURU-560 062. 8. MR. MUNIRAJU S/O. MUNIYAPPA, NO. 226, DODDATOGUR VILLAGE, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU-560 100. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA RAYAPPA., AGA FOR R1 TO 6; R7-SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED; NOTICE TO R8-DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED: 11.07.2024) 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.Udaya Prakash.M., counsel for the petitioners and Sri.Manjunatha Rayappa., AGA for respondents 1 to 6 have appeared in person. Notice to the respondents was ordered on 25.11.2020. A perusal of the office note depicts that respondent No.7 is served and unrepresented. She has neither engaged the services of an advocate nor conducted the case as a party in person. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2710 WP No. 13496 of 2020 2. The short facts are these: It is said that the petitioners were the tenants under Smt.Jayamma - respondent No.7. At the instance of respondent No.8, the State Government initiated action for the demolition of the structures of the properties in question. The owner Jayamma approached this Court in the year 2020 in W.P.No.9723/2020 and sought appropriate relief. The coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 15.03.2021 allowed the petition and the act on the part of the State Government for demolition of the property in question was quashed and a liberty was also accorded for the petitioner therein to approach the competent Civil Court to seek compensation/ damages at the hands of the respondent - Assistant Commissioner, respondent - Tahsildar, the State Government and the eighth respondent Muniraju. 3. The petitioners grievance is that they are the tenants and made huge investments by making interiors to the premises. They contend that because of the act on the part of the State Government for demolition, they have incurred loss. Counsel for the petitioners therefore, submits that the Writ - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2710 WP No. 13496 of 2020 Petition may be disposed of reserving liberty for the petitioners to approach the Civil Court to seek appropriate relief seeking damages. The oral submission made by counsel for the petitioners is placed on record. 4. The act of the State Government in demolishing the property in question was quashed by the coordinate bench of this Court. Taking note of the same, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the Writ Petition reserving liberty for the petitioners to approach the competent Civil Court to seek appropriate relief in accordance with the law if so advised. 5. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 47