Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 85687 (KAR)

PARASHURAMA CHANNAPPA HOSAMANI v. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

WP/101858/2025 · 2025-11-17

M Nagaprasanna

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15738 WP No. 101858 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 101858 OF 2025 (LA-RES) BETWEEN: PARASHURAMA CHANNAPPA HOSAMANI, AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: INGALAGI VILLAGE, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BASAVARAJ S. BYAKOD & SRI. LINGARAJ MARADI, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, U.K.P BAGALKOT – 587 201. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BAGALKOT – 587 201. …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE ORDER AND MODIFY THE ORDER DATED 27-01-2024 IN EX.NO.148/2018 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HUNGUND VIDE ANNEXURE-D IN INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15738 WP No. 101858 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. This Court, by order dated 15.10.2025, had passed the following direction: “Finally, 10 days’ time is granted to comply with the office objections, showing indulgence as it was a common object that is passed. In the event objections are not complied with, as directed by the Co-ordinate Bench earlier, the petitions could be dismissed without showing any indulgence to the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners, as this would be the last straw of opportunity to comply. List this matter on 29.10.2025. Interim order subsisting, if any, is extended till the next date of hearing.” 2. Despite the directions issued by this Court, the office objections have not been complied with till date. Accordingly, the petition stands rejected for non-compliance with the office objections. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE VNP/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 212