- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35181 WP No. 9196 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9196 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. KARTHIK KUMAR S S/O. N. SHANKAR (RETIRED A.R.S.I.), AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, NANDINI MILK PARLOUR, AT C.A.R. POLICE QUARTERS, SIRSI CIRCLE, MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU-560018. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. N UDAYKUMAR., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE CITY ARMED RESERVE HEAD QUARTERS, MYSORE ROAD, Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35181 WP No. 9196 of 2025 BENGALURU-560018. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE-5, CITY ARMED RESERVE HEAD QUARTERS, MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU-560018. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHAMANTH NAIK, HCGP) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE MEMO ISSUED BY THE R-1 DTD 10.03.2025 VIDE NO. KSRPHQ/BLD/5/2025-MT-CAR-HQ-BCP (ANNX-A); DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO CONSIDER THE REQUISITIO LETTER OF THE PETITIOENR DATED 28.02.2025 [ANNEXURE - B] AND RENEW THE RENTAL AGREEMENT OF THE PETITIONER'S SHOP PREMISES FOR THE YEAR 2024-2025 AS PER RENTAL AGREEMENT DATED 01.04.2024 [ANNEXURE - C] AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35181 WP No. 9196 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The short question for consideration in this petition is: whether the City Armed Reserve Police [represented by the respondents] must have recourse to the provisions of the Karnataka Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1974 [for short, 'the Act'] or whether this Court, in the peculiar circumstances of the case, provide for a fair arrangement in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. Mr. N. Uday Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, while inviting this Court's attention to the lease/rent agreement dated 01.04.2024 executed by the first respondent continuing the lease of the subject premises for a milk parlour within the respondents' property at Sirsi Circle, Mysore Road, Bengaluru, submits that: • The first respondent has rejected the petitioner's application for renewal of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35181 WP No. 9196 of 2025 lease by the impugned memorandum dated 10.03.2025 considering none of the circumstances that the petitioner can rely upon. • During the pendency of this petition, the Deputy Commissioner [Administration] has issued the Order dated 14.03.2025 stipulating that the petitioner must be vacated from the premises because the rent is finalized without consent from the Public Works Department and that the petitioner does not satisfy the condition for continuation of the lease. In fact, Mr. N. Uday Kumar, during the previous hearing dates, had stated that the petitioner will voluntarily hand over the premises to the respondents if a reasonable time of two years is granted underscoring that the petitioner has not defaulted in the payment of rent and that the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35181 WP No. 9196 of 2025 petitioner cannot be evicted without due process under the provisions of the Act. 3. Mr. Shamant Naik, the learned High Court Government Pleader, submits that the respondents seek the petitioner's eviction because of the proposed construction of multi-storied residential quarters for the Forces’ personnel and that many occupants have vacated the existing premises. This Court, in the light of these rival submissions, has called for a conciliation meeting. This Court must record that such conciliation has not resulted in any positive outcome. 4. The petitioner is insisting on two years to vacate, and the respondents state that two years would effectively defeat the assurances and the commitment to ensure that construction is completed early and that those who have voluntarily vacated the residential quarters are suitably accommodated. The portion occupied by the petitioner is a small portion - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35181 WP No. 9196 of 2025 of the larger property that is proposed for development. In the peculiarities, this Court is not inclined to opine that the respondents must be compelled to avail recourse under the Act, which would have been necessary if the petitioner had not offered to vacate the premises. As such, the second part of the question would be more relevant for the disposal of the petition. 5. This Court must ensure that mutual interests as also the larger interest [being the need for accommodation for the respondent's personnel in a timely manner without resulting in an escalation of costs of construction] are balanced. When the conflicting interests are thus considered, this Court is of the view that the petitioner must be held to his assurance to vacate and hand over vacant possession of the premises within a reasonable period of time without restraints on the respondents to take all measures as would be necessary to begin and - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35181 WP No. 9196 of 2025 complete the task for obtaining approvals and commencement of the construction. When queried, Mr. Shamanth Naik, on instructions, submits that all the drawings and designs have been submitted and these are being processed for quick approval. In the light of the afore, the following: ORDER a. The petition stands disposed of directing the respondents not to disturb the petitioner for a period of one year beginning from 01.10.2025 subject to the petitioner continuing to pay the agreed rent. b. It is needless to observe that it would always be open to the respondents to engage the petitioner for an earlier vacating if all the plans and designs are approved and permissions are - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35181 WP No. 9196 of 2025 received for early commencement of the construction. RB SD/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE