- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9295 WP No. 104003 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JULY 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.104003 OF 2025 (LB-UC) BETWEEN: SHRI. DURGADEVI DEVASTHANA SEVA SMAITHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT BASAPPA G. CHALAWDI, AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NAINEGALI BAGALKOTE – 587 207, TQ AND DIST: BAGALKOTE. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRUTHVI K. S., ADVOCATE) AND: THE OFFICE OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, NAINEGALI, R/BY ITS PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, NAINEGALI, BAGALKOTE – 587 207, TQ AND DIST: BAGALKOTE. …RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT IS SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 01.02.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE F AND TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER IN TERMS OF RULE 3 AND 4 OF KARNATAKA PANCHAYAT RAJ (REMOVAL OF OBSTRUCTIONS AND ENCROACHMENT) RULES, 2011, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING - B GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9295 WP No. 104003 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: A. Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus by directing the Respondent to consider the representation dated 01.02.2025 vide Annexure - F and to pass appropriate order in terms of rule 3 and 4 of Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Removal of Obstructions and Encroachment) Rules, 2011, in the interest of justice and equity. B. Issue such other suitable order/s or directions as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the representation, which had been submitted by the petitioner on 01.02.2025, has not been considered by the respondent-authority. By way of said representation, the petitioner had alleged that without any permission or sanction, a wine shop has been established. 3. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that despite such representation has been submitted, no action has been taken. Whenever, a citizen were - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9295 WP No. 104003 of 2025 to raise a complaint or grievance, it is for the respondent-authority to have taken necessary action thereon. No action has been taken. I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The petition is allowed. ii. A mandamus is issued directing respondent to consider the representation dated 01.02.2025 vide Annexure-F within a period of four weeks in accordance with law. iii. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion in the merits of the matter. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE AM/- CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 69