- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:7049 WP No. 33058 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 33058 OF 2024 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. H NOORULLA S/O. A. M. HANEEF, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/O. DANDIPETE, KUSHALA NAGARA, KODAGU DISTRICT-571 234. 2. ABDUL WAJID AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, S/O. LATE M. K. ABDUL RABBU, DANDIPETE, KUSHALANAGARA, KODAGU DISTRICT-571 234. …PETITIONERS (BY SMT. MOHANA KUMARI., FOR SRI. ABUBACKER SHAFI., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KODAGU DISTRICT, DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, STUART HILL, MADIKERI-KODAGU DISTRICT-571 201. 3. CHIEF OFFICER TOWN MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7049 WP No. 33058 of 2024 KUSHALANAGARA, KODAGU DISTRICT-571 234. 4. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE COLLEGE ROAD, NEAR FMC COLLEGE, MADIKERI, KODAGU- DISTRICT-571 201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BOPANNA BELLIAPPA., AGA FOR R-1, R-2 & R-4; SRI.VENKATESH.R., BHAGAT., ADVOCATE FOR R-3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 TO 3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS DATED: 18.03.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-D, D1 AND REPRESENTATION DATED. 27.11.2024 AT ANNEXURE-J AND J1, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, 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 to issue a direction to the respondents 2 and 3 to consider the representations dated 18.03.2024 and 27.11.2024, copies of which are produced at Annexures-D, D1, J and J1. By these representations, the petitioners are requesting the Deputy Commissioner as well as the Chief Officer to take action in respect of alleged - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7049 WP No. 33058 of 2024 construction put up on the margin portion of the State Highways. 2. In my view, since the petitioners are contending that certain statutory provisions are violated, it would be imperative for respondents 2 and 3 to consider the aforesaid representations and pass appropriate orders in accordance law with within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 3. It is needless to state that any action that is proposed to be taken, if it affects any third parties, obviously, they would have to be notified before any orders are passed against them. 4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE PKS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 82