- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6699 WP No. 103463 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 103463 OF 2024 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: SHRI VEERABHADRESHWAR ELECTRICALS, BY ITS PROPRIETOR, P. NAGAMURTHY S/O. BAGGURAPPA, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: CLASS I CONTRACTOR, R/O: TEKKALAKOTE TOWN-583 122, TQ: SHIRAGUPPA, DIST: BALLARI. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.S. SANGATI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE CHIEF OFFICER, TOWN PANCHAYAT, TEKKALAKOTE-583 122, TQ: SHIRAGUPPA, DIST: BALLARI. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BALLARI-583 101. 3. THE DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, 9TH AND 10TH FLOOR, VISHWESHVARAYYA GOPUR, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001. 4. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6699 WP No. 103463 of 2024 URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, AGA FOR R2-R4; SRI. S.S. BETURMATH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K.L. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.B.S.Sangati., counsel for the petitioner, Sri.S.S.Beturmath., counsel on behalf of Sri.K.L.Patil., for respondent No.1 and Sri.Praveen K.Uppar., AGA for respondents 2 to 4 have appeared in person. 2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the representations dated:16.07.2021, 21.10.2021 and 15.11.2021 vide Annexures-B, C and D. 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6699 WP No. 103463 of 2024 4. Suffice it to note that the petitioner was before this Court on an earlier occasion and had filed a Writ Petition in No.104113/2016. This Court vide order dated 25.10.2019 disposed of the Writ Petition with certain observations and directed the first respondent to settle the payment to the petitioner along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date due till the date of payment. 5. Counsel Sri.B.S.Sangati., in presenting his arguments submits that the first respondent has paid the amount. However, the interest has not been paid. He argued by saying that the notice was issued on 15.11.2021. Therefore, he submits that mandamus may be ordered. 6. Counsel Sri.S.S.Beturmath., on instructions submits that the first respondent has complied with the order. There is nothing to be paid to the petitioner. Hence, he submits that an appropriate order may be passed. 7. A perusal of the order passed by this Court on 25.10.2019 in Writ Petition No.104113/2016 depicts that the first respondent was directed to settle the payment to the petitioner along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6699 WP No. 103463 of 2024 the date of due till the date of payment. The petitioner alleges that the first respondent has not paid the interest. However, the first respondent submits that the interest has been paid. The notice dated:15.11.2021 is furnished along with the Writ Petition and the same is marked as Annexure-D. I have perused the same minutely. It is a statutory notice issued by the Advocate under Section 80(1) of Civil Procedure Code 1908 read with Section 284(1) of Karnataka Municipality Act 1963. The notice is issued to pay the arrears bill amount along with up to date interest. It has also been stated that they would take appropriate legal steps for the recovery of the interest plus arrears of bill amount. The petitioner alleges the non-payment and the first respondent contends that the payment has been made. The controversy regarding the payment and non- payment cannot be considered in a Writ petition because it involves disputed questions of fact. In general, the disputed question of fact is not investigated in a proceeding under Article 226 and 227 of Constitution of India. This Court cannot order mandamus to address the grievance of the petitioner about the alleged non-payment of interest plus arrears bill amount. The - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6699 WP No. 103463 of 2024 petitioner may take appropriate recourse under law to address his grievance, if so advised. 8. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Because of dismissal of the Writ Petition, all pending interlocutory applications if any are disposed of and the interim order if any granted by this Court stands discharged. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP/RH LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 55