- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37443 WP No. 28449 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 28449 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: MEGHANA CHANDRA REDDY AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS D/O. NARAYANA CHANDRA REDDY RESIDING AT NO.17, 30TH MAIN BTM LAYOUT, 2ND STAGE BENGALURU - 560 076. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SREEVATSA., SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. SYED KHAMRUDDIN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. OFFICE OF THE TAHSILDAR HOSKOTE TALUK REPRESENTED BY TAHSILDAR BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT KAMMAVARI PETE, ALAPPANAHALLI BENGALURU KARNATAKA – 562 129. 2. LAND SURVEYOR HOSKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT KARNATAKA – 562 129. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RADHA B. P., A.G.A.) Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37443 WP No. 28449 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE DATED 15.09.2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT-2 AUTHORITY (ANNEXURE-A) N.C.R/C.R/269/21- 22 AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER Learned AGA takes notice for both the respondents. 2. Learned Senior Counsel Sri Sreevatsa, appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was earlier before this Court in W.P.No.21230/2025, being aggrieved of the notices dated 16.12.2024 issued by the Tahsildar, Hoskote Taluk. This Court by order dated 16.07.2025 noticed that no prior notice has been issued to the petitioner and the petitioner has put up a compound wall around the land in question many years ago. 3. Therefore, the respondents were directed to treat the impugned notices as showcause notices and liberty was given to the petitioner to give a reply within four weeks from the date - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37443 WP No. 28449 of 2025 of the order, while further directing the respondents to afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and thereafter pass necessary orders after verifying the records. 4. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the reply was accordingly given by the petitioner but no proceedings have been held till date, but the impugned notice at Annexure ‘A’ has been stuck to the compound wall of the petitioner. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the petitioner is not aware as to what exactly is the allegation against the petitioner and nothing is made known even in the impugned notice. 5. Having regard to the orders passed by this Court on the previous occasion and on going through the impugned notice at Annexure ‘A’, this Court finds that there is substance in the submission made by the learned Senior Counsel. The principles of natural justice would also require the person who is making allegation to say what exactly is the allegation so that the person against whom the allegation is made would answer to the notice or query raised by the competent authority. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37443 WP No. 28449 of 2025 6. If it is the allegation of the respondents that the petitioner has encroached upon a nala/rajakaluve, then the same has to be clearly stated in the notice as to which area and to what extent the rajakaluves has been encroached upon by the petitioner. 7. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed while setting aside the impugned notice at Annexure ‘A’. Liberty is however reserved to the respondents to issue notice making the statement of allegation clear so that the petitioner will answer to the said notice along with requisite documents. The first respondent-Tahsildar, Hosakote Taluk, should also take note of the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner that the respondents have been acting prejudicially against the petitioner. If that is the allegation, then the jurisdictional Assistant Director of Land Records may be called to conduct the survey in the presence of the petitioner. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE JT/-