- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3214-DB WP No. 51353 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 51353 OF 2019 (LB-RES PIL) BETWEEN: 1. SRI DINESH S JAGADAL S/O SHANTAVEER JAGADAL AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS OCC: ENGINEER R/AT PRASHANTH COLONY VIDYANAGAR, HUBLI DHARWAD DISTRICT-580 031. 2. SRI NAGESH S/O MUTTHA PUJARI AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE R/AT NEAR BANASHANKARI TEMPLE VIDYANAGAR, HUBLI DHARWAD DISTRICT-580 031. 3. SRI SHIVARUDRAPPA S/O VIRUPAKSHAPPA KOSTI AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS OCC: BUSINESS R/AT PRASHANTH COLONY VIDYANAGAR, HUBLI DHARWAD DISTRICT-580 031. Digitally signed by H K HEMA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3214-DB WP No. 51353 of 2019 4. SRI JAYAKUMAR S/O VITTAL SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS OCC: BUSINESS R/AT PRASHANTH COLONY VIDYANAGAR, HUBLI DHARWAD DISTRICT-580 031. 5. SRI ISHWAR S/O BASAVANTHAPPA MUNAVALLI AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS OCC: BUSINESS R/AT PRASHANTH COLONY VIDYANAGAR, HUBLI DHARWAD DISTRICT-580 031. 6. SRI SRINIVAS S/O GOPALKRISHNA LOKAPUR AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS OCC: BUSINESS R/AT PRASHANTH COLONY VIDYANAGAR, HUBLI DHARWAD DISTRICT-580 031. 7. SRI VENUGOPAL S/O KRISHNAPPA PUJAR AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS OCC: BUSINESS R/AT PRASHANTH COLONY VIDYANAGAR, HUBLI DHARWAD DISTRICT-580 031. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. YADUNANDAN N., ADVOCATE) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3214-DB WP No. 51353 of 2019 AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT M S BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DHARWAD DISTRICT DHARWAD-580 001. 3. HUBLI-DHARWAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION SRI SIDDAPPA KAMBLI ROAD HUBLI, DHARWAD DISTRICT-580 021. REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 4. HUBLI-DHARWAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY NAVANAGAR, HUBLI HUBLI, DHARWAD DISTRICT-580 021. REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 5. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, HUBLI DISTRICT DHARWAD 580 020. 6. SRI YELLAPPA S/O HANUMANTHAPPA KALADAGI AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT INGALAHALLI, HUBLI TALUK DHARWAD DISTRICT 581 209. 7. SRI KIRAN S/O TARACHAND JAIN - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:3214-DB WP No. 51353 of 2019 AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT KANDAK ROAD HAVERI-581 110. 8. SMT. REENA W/O KIRAN AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT KANDAK ROAD HAVERI-581 110. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA FOR R1, R2 & R5; SRI. GURUDEV I.GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI. MADANMOHAN M.KHANNUR, ADVOCATE FOR R4; R6 TO R8 ARE SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) THIS W.P. FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENT No.1 TO 5 TO PRESERVE AND MAINTAIN THE LAND MORE FULLY DESCRIBED IN THE SCHEDULE BELOW FOR PUBLIC PURPOSE/CIVIC AMENITIES AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:3214-DB WP No. 51353 of 2019 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA) The present petition is filed styling is as public interest petition. The petitioners, projecting themselves as vigilant and public spirited persons, have advanced the prayers to direct respondent Nos.1 to 5-authorities to preserve and maintain the land in Sy.No.23A admeasuring 1 Acre 26 guntas and 91 Sq. Yards situated at Prashanth Colony, Vidyanagar, Hubli, Dharwad District. 2. The facts pleaded are in nutshell that the land in question was notified and earmarked in the Comprehensive Development Plan showing the purpose of the land use. It is the allegation that the land is not appropriately maintained and that, there is a collusion among the land owners and the authorities. 3. Today when the petition came up for removal of the office objections, it is indicated that the public interest petitioners, after filing of the petition six years back in the year 2019, have not cared to take any steps and some office objections are still to be removed. The public interest petitioners sat tight and took no - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:3214-DB WP No. 51353 of 2019 interest in prosecuting the petition for long six years. The petitioners had no care or urgency. 4. When the petitioners are negligent towards the alleged public cause and have not taken any steps to ensure that the petition is finally posted, and remained inactive since 2019, they are not entitled to prosecute the petition projecting themselves as public interest petitioners. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate Smt. Niloufer Akbar submitted that on petitioners' own showing, the land in question has been sold out in favour of respondent No.7 and the sale deed is also executed. According to her, this aspect is enough for not entertaining the public interest petition. 6. While the petitioners have admitted the above aspect in their pleadings, there is no corresponding prayer in the petition. In that view also, the petition is not liable to be entertained. 7. In above view, the petition is dismissed with the qualifying observation that the competent authority of the respondents shall - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:3214-DB WP No. 51353 of 2019 take appropriate steps in accordance with law if any irregularities are found. In view of dismissal of the petition, any interlocutory application that may be pending, would not survive and stands accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28