- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36356 WP No. 50743 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO.50743 OF 2017 (SCST) BETWEEN: 1. CHANDRAPPA S/O. RANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS 2. R. MALLESHAPPA S/O. RANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS 3. KAMALAMMA D/O. RANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT HARAMAGATTA VILLAGE, HARAMAGATTA POST HOLALOORU HOBLI, SHIVAMOGGA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT. …PETITIONERS AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT DEPUTY COMMISSIONER’S OFFICE SHIVAMOGGA CITY SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT – 577 201. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER SHIVAMOGGA SUB-DIVISION ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER’S OFFICE SHIVAMOGGA CITY SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT – 577 201. Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36356 WP No. 50743 of 2017 3. SRI H. MAHESHWARAPPA S/O. RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS 4. SRI SHIVALINGAPPA S/O. RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 5. SRI GURULINGAPPA S/O. RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS 6. SRI BASAVARAJAPPA S/O. RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS RESPONDENT NOS.3 TO 6 ARE RESIDING AT HARAMAGATTA VILLAGE HARAMAGATTA POST, HOLALOORU HOBLI SHIVAMOGGA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT – 577 201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI ARUNA G. S., H.C.G.P., FOR R-1 AND R-2; SRI D. R. RAJASHEKHARAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R6) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 16.03.2016, IN PROCEEDINGS NO.SC/ST-3/2008-2009 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-B, CONFIRMING THE ORDER DATED 26.08.2008 IN PROCEEDINGS NO.PTCL-CR-27/2003-2004 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 ASSISTANCE COMMISSIONER SHIVAMOGGA SUB-DIVISION PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36356 WP No. 50743 of 2017 THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER Court notice has been issued twice to the petitioners. However, both the times the Court notice have neither been served nor unserved covers or acknowledgement have been received. 2. In that view of the matter, the writ petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution. 3. Liberty is reserved to the petitioners to move an application to re-open the case. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE JT/- CT:VC