- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37601 WP No. 28565 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 28565 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. JAYALAXMI SHETTY W/O SHEKARA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS R/AT 6-70, HOIGE KODI HOUSE ALAPE, PADIL, MANGALORE-575 007. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DHANANJAY KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU 560 001. 2. PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER (PDO) NARINGAANA PANCHAYATH NARINGANA VILLAGE, ULLAL TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA-575 108. 3. SRI. GOPALA KRISHNA SHETTY S/O LATE AITHAPPA SHETTY Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37601 WP No. 28565 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS R/AT D.NO.1-17 "CHOWKA GUTHU HOUSE" NARINGANA VILLAGE & POST ULLAL TALUK, D.K.-575 008. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.K.KENCHEGOWDA, AGA FOR R1; SRI. SHARANJITH SHETTY K., ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R3 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 19.09.2025) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED NOTICE ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER (PDO), NARINGAANA PANCHAYATH, BEARING NO.Gra.Pam. No.35/2025-26 DATED 08.09.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND 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:37601 WP No. 28565 of 2025 ORAL ORDER Respondent no.2 has issued a notice to the petitioner to remove the gate installed by her on the ground that the same is blocking the access to general public to use a public road. 2. The case of the petitioner is that, the road concerned is not a public road but a private road situated on a property belonging exclusively to the petitioner. The petitioner submits that she has the necessary records to show the same and the impugned endorsement has been issued without hearing the petitioner. 3. This Court cannot decide the disputed question of facts. However, taking into consideration the submission made by the petitioner, in my opinion, the ends of justice would be met if an opportunity is given to the petitioner to show to the authorities concerned how the road in question is not a public road, but a private property belonging to the petitioner. Thereafter, respondent no. 2 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37601 WP No. 28565 of 2025 will be entitled to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 4. Hence the following: ORDER i. The petitioner is granted two weeks time from today to produce all the necessary documents and representation to respondent no.2 to show how the road which is the subject matter of the writ petition is not a public road but a private property belonging exclusively to the petitioner; ii. Respondent no.2 shall consider the representation of the petitioner, provided the same is submitted within a period of two weeks from today and thereafter, pass appropriate orders in accordance with law; iii. Till a decision is taken by respondent no.2, no precipitative action will be initiated against the petitioner; - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37601 WP No. 28565 of 2025 iv. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision to be taken by respondent no.2, it is needless to state she has the liberty to approach the appropriate forum in accordance with law; v. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2