- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:116 WP No. 33653 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 33653 OF 2024 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. R PUSHPA W/O K N THIPPESWAMY AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/O DAVANAGERE ROAD JAGALUR-577528, JAGALUR TAUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SIDDAPPA B M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, M S BUILDING, VIDHANA VEEDHI BENGALURU-560001. 2. STATE OF KARNATAKA SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, M S BUILDING, VIDHANA VEEDHI BENGALURU-560001. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAVANGERE DISTRICT DAVANGERE-577002. 4. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DAVANGERE SUB DIVISION DAVANGERE-577002. Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:116 WP No. 33653 of 2024 5. ASST EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT JAGALUR-577528 JAGALUR TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. 6. THE TAHSILDAR JAGALUR TALUK JAGALURU-577528 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. 7. THE CHIEF OFFICER JAGALURU PATTANA PANCHAYATHY JAGALUR-577528 JAGALUR TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL CARIAPPA., AGA FOR R-1 TO 6; SRI. MAHESH R.UPPIN., ADVOCATE FOR R-7) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENT Nos.2 to 7 NOT TO DEMOLISH THE PETITIONER’S PROPERTY PRESCRIBED IN THE SCHEDULE AND CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION MADE BY THE PETITIONER TO RESPONDENT No.7 i.e., ANNEXURE-G, 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 - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:116 WP No. 33653 of 2024 ORAL ORDER 1. This petition has been filed seeking for a direction to respondent Nos.2 to 7 not to demolish the petitioner’s property and consider his representation which has been submitted to respondent No.7 i.e., Pattana Panchayat. 2. The learned counsel appearing for respondent No.7/Pattana Panchayat submits that it is not concerned with the demolition of the property and therefore, the representation submitted to it would be of no consequence. 3. His submission is taken on record. 4. It is also seen that as per Annexure ‘G’, the petitioner has stated that Public Works Department authorities as well as the Pattana Panchayat authorities had marked his property for demolition and therefore, he was submitting a representation. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:116 WP No. 33653 of 2024 5. In light of the fact that no person’s property can be demolished nor can a person be dispossessed from his property, except in accordance with law, it is needless to state here that the respondents shall not take any steps in respect of the petitioner’s property, except in the manner known to law. 6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE RK CT: SN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 61