- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34897 WP No. 26919 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 26919 OF 2025 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. D.M.GOPAL GOWDA S/O VENKATADASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, 2. SRI.M.J.GIRISHA, S/O LATE D.JAYANNA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 3. SRI. GANGADARAIAH, S/O LATE THIMMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 4. SRI. MADHU.M.S. S/O LATE M.N.SOMASEKHARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS 5. SRI.SURYANARAYAN, S/O LATE M.N.SOMASEKHARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT MUDDALINGANAHALLI VILLAGE, THYAMAGONDLU HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 132. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI SHRIPAD GANGADHAR HEGDE, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by GEETHAKUMARI PARLATTAYA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34897 WP No. 26919 of 2025 AND: 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, KUNDANA, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110. 2. THE KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED (KPTCL), REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, KAVERI BHAVAN, K.G.ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009. 3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE), MAJOR WORKS, NORTH DIVISION, KPTCL, ANANDRAO CIRCLE, BANGALORE - 560 009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. WAHEEDA, AGA FOR R1; SRI H.V. DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASHING THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 BEFORE THE RESPONDENT NO.1 IN CASE NO.MAG/CR/01/2025, MAG/CR/03/2025, MAG/CR/04/2025, MAG/CR/05/2025 AND MAG/CR/06/2025 ANNEXURE-A1 TO A5 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 DATED 23.06.25 DIRECTING RESPONDENTS NO.2 & 3 TO IMPLEMENT THE PROJECT AS PER THE APPROVED DPR WITHOUT ANY DIVISION AS PER ANNEXURE-B. THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34897 WP No. 26919 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL ORDER Challenging proceedings in case no.MAG/CR/01/2025, MAG/CR/03/2025, MAG/CR/04/2025, MAG/CR/05/2025 and MAG/CR/06/2025 at Annexures-A1 to A5 initiated by respondent no.1 and seeking for writ of mandamus directing respondents no.2 and 3 not to implement project without approval of DPR, this writ petition is filed. 2. Sri Shripad Hegde, learned counsel for petitioners submitted, petitioners were owners of land bearing Survey no.33/2, 10/5, 57/2, 7/4 and 9/4 situated at Muddalinganahalli village, Thyamagondlu Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk, and petitioners were cultivating said lands. When respondents no.2 and 3 approached them for installation of 66 KV Overhead Transmission Lines from Dabaspet Sub-station to DoddaBelavangala Sub-station. When petitioners opposed same, respondents no.2 and 3 approached respondent no.1 for removal of obstruction. In pursuance of same, proceedings at Annexures-A1 to A5 were initiated and petitioners were notified. But, on verification, it was found that Notification dated 10.03.2021 at Annexure-E, notifying villages through - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34897 WP No. 26919 of 2025 which overhead transmission lines were supposed to pass, did not include Muddalinganahalli village. Therefore, impugned proceedings initiated insofar as petitioners' lands would be illegal. Aggrieved thereby, present writ petition is filed. 3. Sri HV Devaraju, learned counsel directed to accept notice for respondents no.2 and 3, on instructions, filed memo producing copy of Gazatte Notification dated 17.05.2025 and paper publication to substantiate that Muddalinganahalli village was later included in Notification dated 17.05.2025. It was submitted, as there was obstruction while laying transmission lines, they had approached respondent no.1-District Magistrate, on 28.04.2025 as per Annexures-J series, under Section 16(1) of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 ('Act' for short) for removal of obstruction. Therefore, there was sufficient justification for respondent no.1 to have initiated proceedings and sought for dismissal of writ petition. 4. Learned AGA would second submission. 5. Heard learned counsel and perused writ petition record. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34897 WP No. 26919 of 2025 6. From above, it is seen, petitioners' grievance against proceedings initiated by respondent no.1 against petitioners under Section 16(1) of Act, is mainly on ground that petitioners' village was not notified for drawing of overhead transmission lines. Indeed perusal of Notification dated 10.03.2021 at Annexure-E would reveal that Muddalinganahalli village is not included. Though learned counsel for respondents no.2 and 3 has today filed subsequent Gazette Notification dated 17.05.2025, which includes Muddalinganahalli village, same is dated 17.05.2015 and gazatted on 09.06.2025 whereas petition under Section 16(1) of Act at Annexure-J series was filed on 28.04.2025 by respondents. 7. Learned counsel for respondents no.2 and 3 fairly submitted that date of filing of Annexure-J series was prior to issuance of notification dated 09.06.2025. Consequently, proceedings would be illegal. Therefore, on said ground, petitioners would be entitled to succeed insofar as proceedings at Annexures-A1 to A5. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34897 WP No. 26919 of 2025 8. In view of above, writ petition is allowed. Proceedings in case no.MAG/CR/01/2025, MAG/CR/03/2025, MAG/CR/04/2025, MAG/CR/05/2025 and MAG/CR/06/2025 initiated by respondent no.1 at Annexures-A1 to A5 on basis of petitions at Annexure-J series, are quashed. However, respondents no.2 and 3 would be at liberty to approach respondent no.1 again, in case of obstruction, in accordance with law. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE AV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23