- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44150 WP No. 20912 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 20912 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. PAVAN KUMAR S/O LATE PANDURANGA SHETTIGER, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, PROFESSION: ADVOCATE, HAVING OFFICE AT #27, 1ST FLOOR, 1ST CROSS, SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE-560 003 PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT: #131-1, KUJINGIRI HOUSE, TALIPADY VILLAGE, KINNIGOLY, PUNAROOR POST, MANGALORE TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-574 150 … PETITIONER (BY SRI. PAVAN KUMAR., PARTY-IN-PERSON) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (LANDS AND UPOR), 3RD GATE, 5TH FLOOR, MS BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BANGALORE-560 001 2. THE COMMISSIONER, SURVEY, SETTLEMENT AND Digitally signed by VIDYA G R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44150 WP No. 20912 of 2025 LAND RECORDS (SSLR) DEPARTMENT, KR CIRCLE, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA-560 001 3. THE PROJECT OFFICER (YOJANA ADHIKARI), URBAN PROPERTY OWNERSHIP RECORD (UPOR) OFFICE, NEAR MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, MANGALORE, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-575 001 4. THE ENQUIRY OFFICER (UPOR), URBAN PROPERTY OWNERSHIP RECORD (UPOR) OFFICE, NEAR MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, MANGALORE, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-575 001 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHAMANTH NAIK, HCGP) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.3 AND 4 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF PETITIONER DATED 16/06/2025 AT ANNEXURE A AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER The petitioner has filed the present petition seeking for directions to respondent nos.3 and 4 to consider the representation of the petitioner at Annexure-A. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44150 WP No. 20912 of 2025 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has been furnished the Property Card after issuance of notice in the present proceedings. However, it is submitted that there has been undue delay in issuance of property card. 3. Taking note that property card has been furnished, the matter does not call for any further adjudication while all that could be observed is that the State ought to hear to the grievance of the citizens and make attempts to address them without driving the citizens to the court. 4. Accordingly, the petition is disposed off. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE NP