- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47767 WP No. 33486 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 33486 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. PONNACHETTIRA DECHAMMA CARIAPPA W/O LATE CARIAPPA P M AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, 2. PONNACHETTAR CARIAPPA VINAY S/O LATE CARIAPPA P M AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 3. PONNACHETTAR CARIAPPA THAMAYA S/O LATE CARIAPPA P M AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, ALL PETITIONERS ARE R/AT CAUVERY GROUP, NEAR MUTHAPPA TEMPLE, MADIKERI TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT-571 201, (ALL PETITIONERS ARE REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTERED GPA HOLDER) K.C. KARIAPPA [KALENGADA CHENGAPPA KARIAPPA] S/O K.A. CHENGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/AT KALAMATTI ESTATE, AREKADU VILLAGE AND POST, MADIKERI TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT-571 201 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SACHIN B.S., ADVOCATE) AND: THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47767 WP No. 33486 of 2025 MADIKERI TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT-571 201 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. PRATHEEP.K.C., ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE DATED 20.09.2025 AND 23.10.2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AS PER ANNEXURE-A BEARING NO.ªÀÄ£À¸À/eÉE-4/21/2024-25 AND ANNEXURE-B BEARING NO.ªÀÄ£À¸À/vÁ.±Á/21/2025-26. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioners have challenged the notices dated 20.09.2025 and 23.10.2025 issued by the respondent under Section 187 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 (henceforth referred to as 'the Act, 1964' for short). 2. (i) The petitioners contend that they are the owners of land bearing survey No.53/6, block No.16, Mysore Road, Madikeri City Municipality, Kodagu district situate within the limits of the respondent. They contend that the property was leased to one Mrs.Gana for the purpose of constructing a - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47767 WP No. 33486 of 2025 commercial complex. The said lessee applied to the respondent for permission to construct three temporary sheds on the property and the respondent granted the permission vide letter dated 18.08.2023. Pursuant thereto, temporary sheds were erected purportedly in accordance with the sanctioned plan, and electricity connections were thereafter secured to the sheds so put up. After the temporary sheds were erected, the respondent measured the petitioners' property, assessed the same to tax, and subsequently, issued a notice dated 05.01.2024 alleging that the petitioners had unauthorizedly put up temporary sheds in violation of the sanctioned plan. (ii) Upon receipt of the notice, the lessee removed the excess construction put up and filed an affidavit to that effect before the respondent. However based on a complaint lodged by a local organization, the respondent issued a notice dated 20.09.2025 directing removal of the unauthorized sheds put up on the property, and thereafter issued another notice on 23.10.2025 directing removal of the unauthorized construction. Aggrieved by the said notices, the petitioners are before this Court. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47767 WP No. 33486 of 2025 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the action initiated by the respondent is at the behest of a busybody and that the construction put up by the petitioners is in accordance with the sanctioned plan. He submits that the excess construction put up was removed by the lessee, which is evident from the affidavit filed before the respondent. He therefore contends that the notices issued by the respondent are driven by ill-motives and therefore warrant interference by this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent contends that what is issued to the petitioner is only a notice and that instead of replying to the same, he has rushed to this Court. He therefore submits that the writ petition is liable to be rejected as premature. 5. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent. 6. A perusal of the notices dated 20.09.2025 and 23.10.2025 indicates that the respondent had called upon the petitioners to show cause why action should not be taken for - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47767 WP No. 33486 of 2025 putting up the sheds in violation of the sanctioned plan, failing which, action would be initiated to remove the alleged unauthorized construction. The petitioners claim that they submitted their reply on 16.10.2025. The petitioners must have awaited the outcome of the consideration of the said reply but have approached this Court on the apprehension that the respondent may take precipitative action to remove the construction put up on the property. 7. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed off, directing the respondent to consider the reply submitted by the petitioners within 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter proceed in accordance with law. Until such consideration, the respondent shall not take any action to damage, destroy or demolish the sheds erected by the petitioners on the aforementioned property. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE HJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20