- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30586 WP No. 18710 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.18710 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: MR. SWAMY H.S. S/O SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R/AT HARIHARA VILLAGE HONNIGANAHALLI POST SATHANUR HOBLI KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562 126. …PETITIONER (BY SRI K.G. KUMARA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER RAMANAGARA DISTRICT RAMANAGARA-562 159. 2. THE TAHSHILDAR KANAKAPURA TALUK KANAKAPURA - 562 117. 3. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYATH KANAKAPURA TALUK KANAKAPURA - 562 117. 4. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILLA PANCHAYATH Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30586 WP No. 18710 of 2025 RAMANAGARA DISTRICT RAMANAGARA - 562 159. 5. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER TUNGANI GRAMA PANCHAYATH KANALAPURA TALUK - 562 117. 6. MR. RAVI M.R. S/O MARIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT RAYASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SPOORTHI V., HCGP FOR R.1 & R.2; SRI B.J. SOMAYAJI, ADVOCATE FOR R.3, R.4 & R.5; NOTICE TO R.6 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.5 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 06.04.2024 AS PER THE (ANNEXURE- C) AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 13.05.2024 AS PER THE (ANNEXURE- C 1), ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30586 WP No. 18710 of 2025 ORAL ORDER 1. The present writ petition is filed on the ground that respondent No.6 is utilizing the industrial property for commercial purpose. 2. Admittedly, no right of the petitioner is violated. The writ petition is in the nature of public interest litigation. 3. As no right of the petitioner is violated, the writ petition is hereby dismissed. 4. It is needless to state that dismissal of the writ petition will not come in the way of the respondents/authorities to initiate action against respondent No.6, if it is so required in accordance with law. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE hkh. List No.: 2 Sl No.: 21