- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30205 WP No. 52005 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 52005 OF 2019 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: MR. SHANKAR SUVARNA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, S/O AITHU POOJARY, 4TH CROSS, NARIKERE, AMBALPADY, UDUPI - 576 103. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAJESH SHETTIGAR, ADVOCATE) AND: THE COMMISSIONER, CITY MUNICIPLE COUNCIL, UDUPI - 576 101. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.K.PRASAD HEGDE, ADVOCATE) *** THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS FROM THE RESPONDENT IN ISSUING DEMOLITION ORDER DATED 10.10.2019 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT ANNEXURE – A; QUASH THE IMPUGNED DEMOLITION ORDER DATED 10.10.2019 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT (ANNEXURE-A) FOR DEMOLISHING THE BUILDING CONSTRUCTED BY THE PETITIONER AND ETC., Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30205 WP No. 52005 of 2019 THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER The petitioner has challenged the demolition order passed against his property by virtue of the impugned order dated 10.10.2019, by the respondent (Annexure A to the writ petition). The same is challenged on the ground that there was no opportunity of hearing given to the petitioner. 2. The respondent contends that, one Mahesh Shetty complained against the construction being done by the petitioner and he also preferred Writ Petition No.9511 of 2019 (LB-RES) and as per the orders passed in Writ Petition No. 9511 of 2019 ON 09.09.2019, the impugned demolition order has been passed by the respondent. 3. In Writ Petition No. 9511/2019, the following order has been passed: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30205 WP No. 52005 of 2019 "6. Detailed narration of facts would not call for any reiteration. Pursuant to the representations of the petitioner, the respondent has already initiated proceedings under Section 187 of the Act by issuing notices to Sri. Shanker Suvarna on 20.5.2017 and 24.10.2017 vide Annexures-A and D. Till today, no action has been taken by the respondent under Section 187 of the Act. 7. Under the circumstances, it would suffice to direct the respondent to consider the representations of the petitioner vide Annexures-E, F and G and complete the proceedings imitated under Section 187 of the Act as per the notices vide Annexures-A and D in accordance with law within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of." 4. Subsequent to the said order, the respondent was required to hear the petitioner and other affected parties and pass appropriate order, in accordance with law. There is no direction to demolish the construction put up by the petitioner in Writ Petition No.9511/2019. The respondent could not have passed the impugned order, without following the due process and the principles of natural - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30205 WP No. 52005 of 2019 justice and without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 5. Hence the following: ORDER i) The writ petition is allowed; ii) The impugned order dated 10.10.2019 bearing No.UNASA:B1:CR:45/ 2017-18 passed by the respondent vide Annexure A to the writ petition, is hereby set aside. iii) The respondent is hereby directed to hear the petitioner and the complainant and such other persons as he deems necessary and pass appropriate orders as per the directions issued in Writ Petition No.9511/ 2019(LB-RES), as expediently as possible, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30205 WP No. 52005 of 2019 within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE BMV* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 60