- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44802 WP No. 11932 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 11932 OF 2017 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. S N RATHNAMMA W/O M. BALAKRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT NO.328, BAGALUR, BAGALUR POST, JALAHOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK BENGALURU -562149. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. SAMIKSHA PRADHAN, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHIRISH KRISHNA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU -560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, BENGALURU -560 001. 3. THE TAHSILDAR BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU -560 009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA ) Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44802 WP No. 11932 of 2017 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NO.2 AND 3 TO AFFORD AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE PETITIONER PRIOR TO INITIATING ANY ACTION WITH REGARD TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY BEARING NO.301 KHATHA NO.275/480/301 SITUATED AT BAGALURU VILLAGE, JALA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT, MEASURING EAST TO WEST 390 FEET AND NORTH TO SOUTH 18 FEET IN ALL MEASURING 7020 SQ FT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that, the respondents are intending to demolish the property belonging to the petitioner and as such, the petitioner has presented this writ petition, seeking writ of mandamus to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, before initiating any such action. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44802 WP No. 11932 of 2017 3. Having taken note of the averments made in the writ petition, it is the case of the petitioner that, petitioner is the owner of the schedule property. In that view of the matter, if the respondent Nos.2 and 3 intend to take any action against the petitioner, same shall be done in accordance with law, after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 4. With this observation, the writ petition is disposed of. 5. Consequently, I.A.1/2017 does not survive for consideration. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE sac List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2