- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16070 WP No. 111025 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 111025 OF 2019 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: SUKDEV SINGH S/O DASHRATH SINGH, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: 29TH WARD, NEAR RADHA KRISHNA SCHOOL, M.G. NAGAR, HOSPETE. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. V.M. SHEELVANT, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, HOSPETE, BALLARI, BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, HOSAPETE, BALLARI. 3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, HOSAPETE, BALLARI. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SIDDHARTH H.M., ADVOCATE FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 AND R3 IS SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION AND QUASH THE ORDER DATED 04.06.2019 BEARING NO.PÀæ¸ÀA/£À¸ÀºÉÆ/PÀ,¥À/vÁAwæPÀ/2018-2019 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-‘G’, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.11.25 11:59:14 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16070 WP No. 111025 of 2019 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent No.1. 2. The petitioner has questioned the provisional order dated 04.06.2019 issued by the Commissioner, City Municipality, Hosapete. 3. It appears that the said order is passed noticing the deviation in the construction of the building and violation of the terms and conditions imposed in the approved plan. 4. In terms of the said order, there is a direction to remove the structure to the extent of 12.07% of deviation. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the decision taken is without notice to the petitioner and without spot inspection. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1 would submit that notice was issued and spot inspection is done in the presence of the petitioner. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16070 WP No. 111025 of 2019 7. No records are placed to show that notice was issued earlier to 04.06.2019. 8. Under these circumstances, the following: ORDER i. Writ petition is allowed. ii. Impugned order dated 04.06.2019 passed by respondent No.1 is quashed. iii. Liberty is reserved to the respondents to issue fresh notice and pass appropriate orders as contemplated under the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964. iv. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the matter and all contentions kept open. v. The exercise shall be completed within 3 months from the date of this order. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE CLK CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 49