- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26219 WP No. 7273 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 7273 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. H C RENUKA PRASANNA S/O LATE CHARALINGAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, CLOTH MERCHANG, SOMANAHAL ROAD, SANTHEBENNURU VILLAGE, SANTHEBENNUR HOBLI, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DIST.-577552 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. P MANJUNATHA.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY OF REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-01 2. THE TAHASILDAR, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, CHANNAGIRI, DAVANAGERE.-577213 3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR. TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT577002. 4. PANCHAYATDEVELOPMENT OFFICER, VILLAGE PANCHAYAT, SANTHEBENNURU VILLAGE AND POST, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577552 Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26219 WP No. 7273 of 2025 5. SRI.S.R.NAGRAJA S/O S.RUDRAIAH, AGRICULTURIST, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT SASALU MAIN ROAD, SANTHEBENURU VILLAGE, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DIST.-577552 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.H.K.KENCHEGOWDA, AGA FOR R1, 2 AND 3, SRI.S.B.TOTAD., ADVOCATE FOR R5 AND SRI.N.R.JAGADEESWARA, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 4 TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONER REQUEST ANNEXURE-G DATED 9-3-2025 BY REMOVING CONSTRUCTED ILLEGAL BUILDING IN RESERVED AREA OF PARK, PARKING AND OTHER AREA AS SPECIFIED ANNEXURE-C AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned petition is filed seeking appropriate directions against respondents No.1 to 4 in relation to the alleged illegal construction undertaken by private respondent No.5 within areas reserved for park, parking, and other public utilities. The petitioner also seeks a writ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26219 WP No. 7273 of 2025 of mandamus directing the respondents to demolish the unauthorized structures raised over the designated park and parking area. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents No.1 to 3, the learned standing counsel for respondent No.4/Grama Panchayat, and the learned counsel representing private respondent No.5. Perused the records. 3. The petitioner, having purchased sites formed in Sy. Nos. 2/4 and 2/8 measuring 6 acres, is aggrieved by the construction activity carried out by respondent No.5 in the developed layout. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.5, in violation of the sanctioned building license and the approved layout plan, has commenced construction in areas earmarked for park and parking purposes. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26219 WP No. 7273 of 2025 4. The learned counsel for respondent No.4/Grama Panchayat, on instructions, submits that although respondent No.5 had obtained permission to construct a commercial complex in a different portion of the layout, he has, however, proceeded to undertake construction in the areas specifically reserved for park and parking. This factual position is not seriously disputed by respondent No.5. 5. The learned counsel for respondent No.5, while reiterating the averments made in the statement of objections, submits that the construction in the designated park and parking areas was necessitated due to the existence of high-tension electrical lines, which rendered the originally retained commercial portion unsuitable for development. He further submits that respondent No.5 is willing to surrender an equivalent extent of land elsewhere within the same approved layout to be designated as park and parking area in lieu of the encroached portion. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26219 WP No. 7273 of 2025 6. This Court is not inclined to accept the contention advanced by respondent No.5. Once a layout is duly sanctioned by the competent planning authority, and specific areas within the layout are earmarked for civic amenities such as parks, open spaces, and parking areas, such reservations acquire a binding and sacrosanct character. These designations are not mere suggestions but essential components of urban planning, intended to ensure environmental balance, livability, and equitable access to common facilities for all residents of the layout. Any unilateral deviation by the developer or landowner from the approved plan particularly involving public utility spaces like park and parking areas strikes at the very foundation of planned development and cannot be permitted. 7. Respondent No.5, having consciously accepted the sanctioned layout, is bound by its terms and cannot, on the basis of subsequent inconveniences or commercial considerations, proceed to alter or encroach upon land - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26219 WP No. 7273 of 2025 reserved for public use. If any genuine difficulty arises, the only lawful course is to seek appropriate modification of the layout through the competent statutory authority, which alone has the power to evaluate and approve such changes after due process and public interest consideration. 8. In the present case, the petitioner, who is the owner of four sites within the approved layout, has a vested legal right to ensure that the layout is developed and maintained in strict conformity with the sanctioned plan. He is therefore justified in seeking directions against respondent No.4/Grama Panchayat to initiate necessary action against respondent No.5 for undertaking construction activity in areas earmarked for park and parking. 9. This Court is of the firm view that the construction carried out by respondent No.5 in the designated civic amenity areas constitutes a blatant violation of the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26219 WP No. 7273 of 2025 approved plan and warrants immediate corrective steps by respondent No.4 in accordance with law. The statutory authorities cannot remain passive spectators in the face of such encroachments, especially when they affect spaces meant for the collective use and benefit of residents. Preservation of park and civic amenity areas is not only a statutory mandate but a constitutional obligation traceable to the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution, which includes the right to a clean, healthy, and well- planned environment. 10. For the foregoing reasons, this Court passes the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed; ii. Respondent No.4/gram panchayat is hereby directed to restore the park and parking area by taking appropriate action against respondent No.5; - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26219 WP No. 7273 of 2025 iii. This exercise shall be accomplished within a period of three months from the date of receipt of order copy. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed off. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3