- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26400 WP NO.21230 OF 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.21230 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: MEGHANA CHANDRA REDDY D/O NARAYANA CHANDRA REDDY AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT NO.17, 30TH MAIN, B.T.M. LAYOUT, 2ND STAGE BENGALURU - 560 076. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S. SREEVATSA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. SYED KHAMRUDDIN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. OFFICE OF THE TAHSILDAR HOSKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT KAMMAVARI PETE, ALAPPANAHALLI, BENGALURU - 562 129. REP. BY THE TAHSILDAR. 2. TOWN SURVEYOR HOSKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 129. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SIDDHARTH BABRURAO, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICES DATED 16TH DECEMBER, 2024 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1-AUTHORITY VIDE ANNEXURES 'A' TO 'A3'; QUASH THE SURVEY SKETCH DATED 12TH FEBRUARY, 2024 Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26400 WP NO.21230 OF 2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2-AUTHORITY VIDE ANNEXURE-B; AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Sri. Siddharth Baburao, learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondents. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the notices dated 16th December, 2024 (Annexures 'A' to 'A3') issued by the respondent No.1-Tahsildar and Survey Sketch dated 12th February, 2024 (Annexure-B) issued by the respondent No.2. 3. Heard Sri. S. Sreevatsa, learned Senior Counsel on behalf of Sri. Khamruddin, appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Siddharth Baburao, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents. 4. Sri. S. Sreevatsa, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner invited the attention of the Court to the notices dated 16th December, 2024 (Annexures 'A' to 'A3') and submitted that the impugned notices have not been served to - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26400 WP NO.21230 OF 2025 the petitioner and the petitioner is not aware about averments in the notice the and that apart, the land in question has been phoded by the respondent-Authorities themselves. Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that, after conducting Phodi of the land in question, the petitioner had put-up compound and therefore no encroachment has been made by the petitioner. Accordingly, he sought for interference of this Court. 5. Per contra, Sri. Siddharth Baburao, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents sought to justify the impugned notices and submitted that the notices have been issued to remove the encroachment, if any, in the Rajakaluve or Bandi Dari. Accordingly, he sought for dismissal of the writ petition. 6. In the light of submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, I have carefully examined writ papers, the same would indicate that the phodi has been conducted in respect of the land in question and the sketch has been produced accordingly. In that view of the matter, I find force in the submission made by learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner. However, taking into consideration - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26400 WP NO.21230 OF 2025 the fact that the petitioner has not been heard in the matter, I am of the view that, the petitioner be directed to file a reply to the impugned notices by considering the same as show-cause notices within four weeks from today. If such a reply is made by the petitioner, the respondents shall consider the same and take decision in the matter in accordance with law, after providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. It is made clear that that the petitioner shall submit the relevant documents along with the reply to enable the respondent- Authorities to take appropriate decision in the matter. 7. It is also made clear that, till the consideration of the reply that may be made by the petitioner to the impugned notices, the respondent-Authorities shall not take any precipitative action against the petitioner in respect of the land in question. With this observation, writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- (E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1