- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46223 WP No. 6925 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 6925 OF 2020 (GM-R/C) BETWEEN: 1. SRI ADISHAKTHI SHIVANASAMUDRA AMMANAVARA TEMPLE NO.425/A, 13TH CROSS, 'G' BLOCK, RAMAKRISHNAGARA, MYSURU-570 222, REPRESENTED BY PRIEST SRI ARCHAK GAJENDRA. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. Y.K. NARAYANA SHARMA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR BEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR BEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MYSURU DISTRICT, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MYSURU-570 095. Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46223 WP No. 6925 of 2020 4. THE MYSURU URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (MUDA), JHANSI RANI LAKSHMI BAI ROAD, CHAMARAJA MHALLA, LAKSHMIPURAM, MYSURU-570 005. 5. MYSURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, MYSURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE OFFICES, NEXT TO BANUMAIAH COLLEGE, SAYYAJI RAO ROAD, MYSURU-570 024. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SMT. GEETHADEVI M.P., ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-3 TO 5 TO CONSIDER THE REQUESTS OF THE PETITIONER DATED 11.02.2020 AS PER ANNEXURE-D TO F RESPECTIVELY AND NOT TO DEMOLISH THE PETITIONER TEMPLE OR PASS OTHER SUITABLE ORDERS TO SAFEGUARD THE INTEREST OF THE PETITIONER BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT PETITION AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. In this writ petition, the grievance of the petitioner is with regard to consideration of the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46223 WP No. 6925 of 2020 representations dated 11.02.20220 (Annexure-D to F) and restraining the respondents from interfering with the demolition of the temple. 3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for parties and taking into consideration the averments made in the writ petition, I am of the view that, the respondent-authorities are directed not to demolish the temple in question without due process of law, unless the temple is in a dilapidated condition and with regard to same, the respondent-authorities have to get the technical report from the competent authority and thereafter, take further action in the matter in accordance with law. With this observation, the writ petition is disposed of. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SB:List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21