- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3491 WP No. 200345 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.200345 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. K. BHEEMANNA S/O K. MUDRANGAPPA, AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE & BUSINESS, 2. SMT. SHSHIKALA W/O K. BHEEMANNA, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, BOTH ARE R/O C-1, K.M. COLONY, MANTRALAYAM ROAD, TQ. & DIST. RAICHUR-584 103. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ARUNKUMAR AMARGUNDAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, RAICHUR, DIST. RAICHUR-584 101. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, CITY CORPORATION, RAICHUR, TQ. & DIST. RAICHUR-584 101. 3. SRI. RAJENDRAKUMAR PATIL S/O VITHALRAO PATIL, Digitally signed by LUCYGRACE Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3491 WP No. 200345 of 2025 AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O H.NO.1-10-71/41, KALLUR COLONY, STATION ROAD, RAICHUR, TQ. & DIST. RAICHUR-584 103. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHESHADRI JAISHANKAR, AGA FOR R1; SRI. GOURISH S. KHASHAMPUR, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. SHAHNAWAZ MAMADAPUR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND MANDAMUS AND GRANT ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT IN THE FOLLOWING TERMS: A) QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO.gÁ£À¸À/PÀlÖqÀ ±ÁSÉ/¹Dgï/ 2024-25 DATED 15.01.2025, ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-N1. B) FURTHER, DECLARE THE ORDER BEARING NO.RANASA/ KATTADA-B/ CR.PATRA/ 2022-23 DATED 06.03.2023 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-J, IS BINDING ON RESPONDENT NO.2 AND THEREFORE RESTRAIN THE RESPONDENT NO.2 PERMANENTLY FROM DEMOLISHING THE 35 TIN-SHED SHOPS OWNED AND POSSESSED BY THE PETITIONERS CONSTRUCTED ON THE LANDS BEARING SY.NO.1130, 1131, 1136 and 1137, SITUATED AT RAICHUR CITY. C) SUCH FURTHER ORDER OTHER RELIEFS BE GRANTED TO THE PETITIONERS TO WHICH THE PETITIONERS WOULD BE FOUND ENTITLED TO ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3491 WP No. 200345 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN) The case of the petitioners is that, they have put up 35 tin shed shops on private property after obtaining the necessary permission from the authorities concerned. 2. The case of respondent No.3, who is an individual claiming certain rights over the property on which the sheds are put up, is that, a portion of the said sheds is on private property, while as the other portion is on public road. For the said reason, he has given complaints to respondent Nos.1 and 2 and has requested them to have the petitioners evicted from the public property and also demolish the same. Respondent No.2, on 06.03.2023 has passed an order in favour of the petitioners, where he has held that the sheds have been granted due permission and there is no encroachment of public road. However, subsequently on 15.01.2025, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3491 WP No. 200345 of 2025 respondent No.2 has passed an order to the contrary. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. 3. There is a disputed question of fact in the instant writ petition. The issue involves whether there has been an encroachment of public road and whether there has been an illegal construction put up on a private property. Both these issues cannot be decided by this Court when there is conflicting stand taken by different parties, more so, by respondent No.2 himself. 4. It is needless to state, if any portion of the public road is encroached upon, a duty is cast on respondent Nos.1 and 2 to initiate appropriate action forthwith and remove the encroachment. In case construction is put up without obtaining due permissions on a private property, respondent Nos.1 and 2 are at liberty to initiate appropriate action in accordance with law. If any rights of respondent No.3 is violated by the petitioners in respect of the property concerned, he is at - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3491 WP No. 200345 of 2025 liberty to approach the competent Civil Court to redress his grievances. Similarly, petitioners are also at liberty to approach the appropriate Civil Court, if there is interference in peaceful enjoyment of their property by any third party. 5. In so far as it relates to the impugned order at Annexure-N1 issued by respondent No.2, it is seen that the same is issued on the ground that petitioners have not produced any document to show that they are the owners of the property concerned or have any right over the same and further because they have not produced any documents to show that necessary permissions were granted to put up the said sheds. Prima facie, respondent No.2 has come to the conclusion that there is encroachment of public road. The order further recommends that encroachment has to be removed after necessary survey. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3491 WP No. 200345 of 2025 6. At this juncture, the petitioners submit that if an opportunity is given to them, they would produce the necessary documents before respondent No.2 showing that they have got rights in respect of a property concerned and that there is no encroachment of public property and that after obtaining the necessary permissions and licenses they have constructed the shops. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that interest of justice would be met, if petitioners are permitted to appear before respondent No.2 and produce all the necessary records and thereafter a direction is issued to respondent No.2 to act in accordance with law. 7. Hence, the following: ORDER i. Petitioners shall appear before respondent No.2 on 28.07.2025 at 11.00 a.m. without any further notice. ii. Respondent No.2 shall hear the petitioners, examine any representations made by them - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3491 WP No. 200345 of 2025 and the documents that may be produced by the petitioners and thereafter initiate appropriate action in pursuance of the impugned order at Annexure-N1 to the writ petition. The same shall be done in accordance with law. iii. Till a decision is taken by respondent No.2, the parties concerned shall maintain status quo in respect of the property concerned. iv. Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. v. In view of disposal of the writ petition, I.A.2/2025 does not survive for consideration and the same is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE LG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26