- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15902 WP No. 29956 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 29956 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI PUTTESWAMYGOWDA K AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O KARIYAPPA, 2. SRI SHIVARAMEGOWDA.K.M. AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, S/O MARIGOWDA, 3. NINGARAJU.K.B., AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, S/O BOMMEGOWDA, 4. SRI K.M.PUTTEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O LATE MARIGOWDA, 5. SRI SIDDARAMEGOWDA, AGED 68 YEARS, S/O MARIGOWDA, SENIOR CITIZEN NOT CLAIMED 6. SRI KRISHNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, S/O PUTTALINGEGOWDA, 7. SRI K.M.JAYARAMU, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, S/O MARIGOWDA, SENIOR CITIZEN NOT CLAIMED 8. SRI NAGESH.K.P., AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, S/O LATE PUTTEGOWDA, Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15902 WP No. 29956 of 2024 ALL ARE RESIDENT OF KONDAPURA VILLAGE, VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562159 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. RAJA L., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE TAHASILDAR CHANNAPATNA, CHANNAPATNA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562159. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, RAMANAGARA SUB-DIVISION, RAMANAGARA, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562159. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, RAMANAGARA, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562159 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.MANJUNATH., HCGP) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS NO. 2 AND 3 THE PETITIONERS GIVEN THE REPRESENTATION TO CONSIDER THEIR REPRESENTATION DTD 12.03.24 VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND H. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. The prayer in this writ petition is for issuance of a mandamus to direct respondent Nos.2 and 3 to - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15902 WP No. 29956 of 2024 consider the representation dated 12.03.2024, the copies of which are produced as Annexure – G and H. 2. By the said representation, the petitioners are requesting the Authorities to take action regarding an alleged encroachment in Sy.No.105. 3. In my view, since the petitioners are contending that a Government School building was demolished and an illegal road was formed by encroaching upon the property of the School, it would be appropriate to direct respondent No.3 to consider the representation and pass an order within a period of one month. 4. This petition is accordingly disposed of. 5. In view of the disposal of the petition, all pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE GSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4