- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8556-DB CCC No.100199 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K V ARAVIND CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.100199 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. MALAGOUDA S/O NEMAGOUDA IMAGOUDANAVAR AGE. 76 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. BASTI ONI, YALLIMUNOLI, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI. 2. ANNASAB S/O BHIMGOUDA IMAGOUDANAVAR AGE. 56 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. BASTI ONI, YALLIMUNOLI, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI. 3. PARIS DEVAGOUDA IMAGOUDANAVAR AGE. 59 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. BASTI ONI, YALLIMUNOLI, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI. 4. JAYPAL BHIMAGOUDA IMAGOUDANAVAR AGE. 54 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. BASTI ONI, YALLIMUNOLI, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI. 5. UDAYKUMAR ALAGOUDA IMAGOUDANAVAR AGE. 52 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. BASTI ONI, YALLIMUNOLI, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI. …COMPLAINANTS (BY SRI. S.S. BETURMATH FOR SRI. ABHINANDAN M.G., ADVOCATE) VINAYAKA B V Digitally signed by VINAYAKA B V Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.07.15 10:16:48 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8556-DB CCC No.100199 of 2025 AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CHIEF SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-1. REPT. BY RAJENDRA KUMAR KATARIA 2. TAHASHILDAR TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI. REPT. BY MANJULA NAIK 3. GRAM PANCHAYAT YALIMUNOLI TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI. REPT. BY CHANDRAPPA GUDADARI 4. PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER YALLIMUNOLI, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI. REPT. BY ITS CHAIRMAN MEERSAHAB MULTANI …ACCUSED 5. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, AT DHARWAD. …PROFORMA RESPONDENT (BY SRI. G.K. HIREGOUDAR, GOVT. ADV. FOR R5; NOTICE TO A2 IS SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED) --- THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, R/W. ARTICLE 215 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1950, PRAYING TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF THE OFFENCE OF THE ACTS OF ACCUSED PERSONS UNDER THE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, 1971 FOR WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF ORDER DATED 11-07-2024, PASSED IN W.P. NO.102991/2024 (GM- RES), VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 & ETC. THIS CONTEMPT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8556-DB CCC No.100199 of 2025 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K V ARAVIND ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS) Learned Government Advocate has filed a memo along with a copy of the communication dated 07.07.2025 made by the Tahsildar, Hukkeri, addressed to the petitioners. 2. Learned Government Advocate has pointed out in the communication that, the Tahsildar took steps in terms of the directions issued by the learned Single Judge, and on the second date fixed after issuance of notice, i.e., on 27.11.2024, in the presence of the petitioner, the survey was conducted and it was found that some persons had encroached upon the government road. In the presence of the Adhyaksha of Gram Panchayat, Elimunnoli, and the petitioner herein, the encroachment was removed and the cleared roads were handed over to the jurisdiction of the Panchayat. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8556-DB CCC No.100199 of 2025 3. Per contra, learned Counsel for the petitioner has also filed a memo along with certain photographs. Learned counsel submits that, it is clear from the photographs that various crops are seen grown on the road portion. Learned Counsel would further submit that, in the representation given by the petitioner, which was directed to be considered by the learned Single Judge, the petitioner had requested that the road in question should be metalled, and this has not been considered by the respondents. 4. However, when this Court asked the learned Counsel for the petitioner to point out the provision of law in the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, which requires the Kaalu Daari or Bandi Daari to be metalled, learned Counsel for the petitioner had no answer. Even otherwise, what was directed by the learned Single Judge was that the Tahsildar should consider the representation given by the petitioners, and having regard to the guidelines issued by the Government in the notification dated 20.10.2023 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8556-DB CCC No.100199 of 2025 (wrongly shown as 20.03.2023), the grievance of the petitioner was to be redressed. 5. We have gone through the circular dated 20.10.2023 issued by the Government. In the circular, directions are issued to all concerned to ensure that the pathways running between the private lands should be kept clear for the usage of the villagers to go from one land to another. Having regard to such directions, it is clear that action has been taken by the Tahsildar to ensure that the bandi daari in question is kept clear from any sort of encroachment. 6. We also have to observe that the petitioners did not implead the persons who are said to have encroached upon the said bandi daari. The minimum requirement in accordance with law is that the petitioners should have impleaded such persons, if allegations are made against them, that they have encroached upon public property. The aggrieved should be appraised, is the constitutional - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8556-DB CCC No.100199 of 2025 creed flowing from the Postulates of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. That having not been done by the petitioner, no further directions can be given to the respondents in that regard. 7. We are satisfied that the encroachments on the bandi daari have been removed by the Tahsildar in the presence of the petitioner. We however direct the respondent authorities to ensure that no encroachment is caused on the bandi daari in future. 8. With this, we close the contempt petition. Sd/- (R.DEVDAS) JUDGE Sd/- (K V ARAVIND) JUDGE gab ct:vp List no.: 1 Sl no.: 27