- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50509 WP No. 36448 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 36448 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. M/S ANNAPURNA EDUCATION TRUST R/O 14/1, 3RD MAIN, PAPAREDDDYPALYA, NAGARABHAVI 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 072 REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN MR.T.V. MOHAN S/O LATE VENKATA SWAMY THE PETITIONER NO.1 IS THE PRIVATE EDUCATION TRUST AND THE SAME IS REGISTERED THROUGH THE REGISTERED TRUST. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANKET M. YENAGI., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001 Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50509 WP No. 36448 of 2025 2. THE TAHASHILDAR BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, KANDAYA BHAVAN K G ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001 3. THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BENGALURU - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER 4. THE BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TASK FORCE (BMTF) BBMP HEAD OFFICE N R SQUARE, BENGALURU - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE 5. THE BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE (BBMP) N R SQUARE, BENGALURU - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHAMANTH NAIK, HCGP FOR R1, R2 & R4; SRI K. KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER, OR DIRECTION, QUASHING THE NOTICE DATED 30.06.2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO THE PETITIONER AT - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50509 WP No. 36448 of 2025 ANNEXURE-D, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER Petitioner has called in question the correctness of the notice under Section 104 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. By virtue of the notice at Annexure-D, it is the assertion of the Authorities that in Sy. No. 14/1B, there is an extent of 0.05 guntas of 'Halla', which is stated to have been encroached upon. 2. Petitioner has contended that he has sought for certain documents which are in possession of the respondent - Authorities and upon receipt of said documents, he would make out a reply. 3. Learned High Court Government Pleader submits that the notice at Annexure-D may be treated to be a show cause notice and the petitioner may submit his - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50509 WP No. 36448 of 2025 reply to the said show cause notice. It is further submitted that respondents 2 and 4 would conduct a spot inspection along with relevant records and after making a survey and spot inspection, necessary recommendation would be made to the appropriate authority, if circumstances are made out regarding any encroachment as asserted in the notice at Annexure-D. 4. Needless to state, petitioner's request for documents in order to take appropriate stand regarding the notice at Annexure-D which is treated to be show cause notice, are to be furnished. Petitioner to make a fresh application before the Tahsildar within 7 days from today as to the documents required from the office of the Tahsildar. Upon receipt of such application, the documents in possession of the authorities which are sought for may be made over to the petitioner within one week thereafter. It is clarified that respondents - Authorities are permitted to carry out spot inspection or survey with due notice. The principles of natural justice to be adhered to in the enquiry - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50509 WP No. 36448 of 2025 in coming to conclusion whether there is any encroachment. 5. Needless to state, till final order is passed in terms of the observations made above, no precipitative action to disturb the possession of the petitioner to be resorted to. The observations made herein are only in the context of notice at annexure-D and would not in anyway affect or prejudice the BDA, as the learned counsel for the BDA submits that separate proceedings are pending between the petitioner and the BDA. 6. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of. All contentions are kept open. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE VP