- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32134 WP No. 8621 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 8621 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. P.N.SUJATHA W/O B. RAJANNA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, JALA HOBLI BANGALORE NORTH TALUK PRESENTLY YELAHANKA TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT -562 149. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. VASUNDARA T.P., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SIDDAMALLAPPA P.M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYATH RAJ AND LOCAL BODIES, M.S.BUILDING BANGALORE-560 001. 2. THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER BAGALUR GRAM PANCHAYATHI, BAGALUR JALA HOBLI, YELAHANKA TALUK BANGALORE-562 149. 3. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYAT, YELAHANKA BANGALORE-560 064. 4. SRI.E.RAJANNA S/O LATE ERAPPAA Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32134 WP No. 8621 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS RESIDING AT BAGALUR COLONY JALA HOBLI, YELAHANKA TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT-562 149. 5. SMT.RAJAMMA W/O E.RAJANNA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS RESIDING AT BAGALUR COLONY JALA HOBLI, YELAHANKA TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT-562 149. 6. SRI. MANJUNATHA S/O E.RAJANNA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS RESIDING AT BAGALUR COLONY JALA HOBLI, YELAHANKA TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT-562 149. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SPOORTHI V., HCGP FOR R1; SRI. B.J.SOMAYAJI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3; SRI. N.RAMESHA, ADVOCATE FOR R4 TO R6) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO TAKE NECESSARY LEGAL ACTION AGAINST RESPONDENT NOS.4 TO 6 FROM PUTTING UP ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY BY ENCROACHING THE ROAD MARGIN PORTION EXISTING BETWEEN THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY AND THE BAGALUR DEVANAHALLI MAIN ROAD IN ANY MANNER BY CONSIDERING THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER AS PER ANNEXTURE- D AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32134 WP No. 8621 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition alleging encroachment of Bagalur - Devanahalli Main Road by respondent nos.4 to 6 and has prayed for the following reliefs: "a) ISSUE a Writ of mandamus and thereby direct the Respondents to take necessary legal action against the Respondent Nos.4 to 6 from putting up any construction on the schedule property by encroaching the Road margin portion existing between the schedule property and the Bagalur - Devanahalli Main Road in any manner by considering the petition filed by the Petitioner as per Annexure-'D'. b) ISSUE any other appropriate Writ, Order of Direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant under the facts and circumstances of the case, by allowing the writ petition with exemplary cost, to meet the ends of justice and equity." 2. Learned counsel appearing for respondent nos.4 to 6 submits that no such alleged encroachment has been done and the building is being constructed on their own property. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32134 WP No. 8621 of 2025 3. Learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3- Panchayaths upon instruction submits that there has been no alleged encroachment as stated by the petitioner. 4. This Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot resolve a dispute when the lis involves disputed question of facts. The counsel appearing for Gram Panchayat and the Taluk Panchayat upon instructions has submitted there is no such alleged encroachment by respondent nos.4 to 6. If the petitioner is desirous of challenging the same, she can always approach the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction. Subject to the aforementioned observation, the writ petition is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41