Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 76749 (KAR)

SMT.PRIYA v. THE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITIES OF INDIA

WP/16951/2025 · 2025-09-18

M I Arun

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37804 WP No. 16951 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.16951 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. PRIYA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, W/O S MANI, R/O MASKAL MATTI, KASABA HOBLI, HIRIYUR TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 598. 2. SRI H.R. VEERESH, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, S/O LATE H.V. RUDRANNA, R/O. VEERABHADRESHWARA NILAYA 1ST FLOOR, 2ND CROSS, GANDHI LAYOUT, HULIYAR ROAD CROSS, HIRAYURU TOWN, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 598. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. M.R. RAJAGOPAL, ADVOCATE FOR S.V. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITIES OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, (AN AUTHORITY CONSTITUTED UNDER NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY INDIA ACT, 1988) G5 AND G6, SECTOR-10, DWARAKA, NEW DELHI-110 075. Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37804 WP No. 16951 of 2025 2. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS, PORTS AND INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001. 3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA 4TH FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA BANGALORE-01. 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, CHITRADURGA-577 501. 5. THE TAHSILDAR HIRIYUR TALUK, HIRIYUR, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 598. 6. THE CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (C AND B), K.R. CIRCLE, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001. 7. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, CHITRADURGA, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 501. 8. THE CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, HIRIYUR TOWN, HIRIYUR, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 598 BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37804 WP No. 16951 of 2025 9. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, HIRIYUR, HIRIYUR TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 598. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SHRUTI CHAGANTI, ADVOCATE FOR R.1; SRI. H.K. KENCHEGOWDA, AGA FOR R.2 TO R.7 AND R.9; SRI S. MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R.8) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE/COMMUNICATION DATED 17.05.2025 ISSUED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT BEARING NO. HI.NA.SA.NYA.SHAKHE/CR:02/2025-26 ON THE 1ST PETITIONER PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-J, NOTICE/COMMUNICATION DATED 14.05.2025 ISSUED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT BEARING NO.HI.NA.SA.NYA.SHAKHE/CR:01/2025-26 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-K AND NOTICE/COMMUNICATION DATED 14.05.2025 ISSUED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT BEARING NO.HI.NA.SA.NYA.SHAKHE/CR:01/2025-26 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-L BOTH ON THE 2ND PETITIONER, 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 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37804 WP No. 16951 of 2025 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioners in the instant writ petition have challenged the notices dated 17.05.2025 and 14.05.2025 (vide Annexures-J, K and L) issued by respondent No.8 alleging that the petitioners have encroached upon road and foot path and have put up illegal construction. The petitioners are required to appear before respondent No.8 and make their submission. Only if respondent No.8 comes to the conclusion that the petitioners have indeed encroached upon public property as alleged after examining the records and submissions of the petitioners, action is contemplated against the petitioners. Under the circumstances, the writ petition will have to be considered as premature. 2. Hence, the following order is passed: ORDER (i) The writ petition is hereby dismissed; (ii) The petitioners shall appear before respondent No.8 - City Municipal Council, Hiriyur on 13.10.2025 at 3.00 p.m.; - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37804 WP No. 16951 of 2025 (iii) The respondents are directed not to precipitate the matter against the petitioners till an appropriate decision is taken by respondent No.8 in this regard. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE hkh. List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24