- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39844 WP No. 29880 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 29880 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI RAMAPPA S/O LATE DODDASONNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, 2. SRI SUBRAMANI S/O LATE DODDASONNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, 3. SRI SRINIVASA @ SEENAPPA S/O, LATE DODDASONNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, 4. SRI D. KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE DODDASONNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, 5. SRI BABU S/O SUBRAMANI, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, 6. PRAKASH S/O SEENAPPA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT: YELACHAHALLI VILLAGE, NANDAGUDI HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562114. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRADEEP H. S., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39844 WP No. 29880 of 2025 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPT. OF REVENUE, GOVT. OF KARNATAKA, DR. AMBEKAR VEEDHI, VIDHANA SOUHDA, BENGALURU-560001. REP. BY SECRETARY. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DODDABALLAPURA, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562114. 3. THE TAHSILDAR HOSAKOTE TALUK, HOSAKOTE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562114. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHAMANTH NAIK, HCGP) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 09.09.2025 VIDE NO.NCR/CR/155/22-23 ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR / 3RD RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 104 OF THE KLR ACT 1964 AT ANNEXURE 'A'. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39844 WP No. 29880 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioners have called in question correctness of the notice dated 09.09.2025 issued by the Tahsildar under Section 104 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short 'the Act'). 2. A perusal of the notice would indicate that the petitioners have been called upon to furnish documents and take their stand as regards the assertion of the State Authorities that the Raja Kaluve goes through Sy.No.34 of Yelachahalli Village, Nandagudi Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, which has been encroached upon by the petitioners. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Section 104 of the Act relates to summary eviction. However, there has to be a detailed inquiry preceded by a survey with notice to the petitioners indicating alleged encroachment of Raja Kaluve as sought to be made out in the notice at Annexure-A, and only after such exercise is completed, the question of eviction could be considered. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39844 WP No. 29880 of 2025 4. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the proceedings initiated through a notice gives an opportunity to the petitioners to place documents and take their stand regarding assertion of the State that the Raja Kaluve running through the petitioners' property has been encroached. It is further submitted that, needless to state, in order to ascertain the extent of the Raja Kaluve stated to be running through the petitioners' property, survey would be conducted with due notice to the petitioners. 5. In light of the said stand, the writ petition is disposed of while making it clear that the notice at Annexure-A if proceeded upon, must be with adherence to principles of natural justice. Further, there ought to be a survey with notice to the petitioners before coming to any conclusion regarding encroachment. It is made clear that the respondent-State is to follow the procedure contemplated under the Land Revenue Act, in the event - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39844 WP No. 29880 of 2025 they seek to take action to remove encroachment as alleged. 6. The contention of the petitioners regarding adherence to proper procedures prescribed under the Land Revenue Act is kept open to be considered by the State. Accordingly, petition is disposed of while making it clear that action if any for eviction, must be only after conclusion of the proceedings pursuant to the notice issued. 7. Needless to state, the respondents to ensure that the statutory procedure as prescribed under the Act and Rules for recovery of encroached land would be strictly adhered. The petitioner to make his response to the notice within a period of three weeks from today. 8. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE MCR