- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20122-DB WA No. 949 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT APPEAL NO. 949 OF 2026 (KLR-RES) BEEEN: 1. SMT R SUJATHA W/O LATE RAMASWAMYREDDY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS 2. SRI THILOTHAMA R S/O LATE RAMASWAMYREDDY AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS 3. SMT ARUNI A R D/O LATE RAMASWAMYREDDY AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS APPELLANTS 1 TO 3 ARE ALL R/AT ALIBOMASANDRA VILLAGE, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. A MADHUSUDHANA RAO., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560001 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU CITY Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20122-DB WA No. 949 of 2026 BENGALURU K G ROAD, BENGALURU 560009 3. THASILDAR ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU 562106 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.S.ARUNA HCGP FOR R1 TO R3) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 10/03/2026 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.6577/2026, ALLOW THIS WRIT APPEAL WITH COSTS AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) The present intra Court appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 10.03.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.6577/2026 filed by the appellant. 2. The appellants/petitioners had sought to challenge the internal communication dated 20.01.2026 made by the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20122-DB WA No. 949 of 2026 Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Urban District, to the Tahsildar, Anekal Taluk to take action in accordance with law to remove all encroachments on the Rajakaluve in between Muthanalluru Amanikere and Alibommasandra Village. 3. The appellants/petitioners owned some land adjoining to said Rajakaluve where the Rajakaluve has been leveled and road has been laid over it. 4. The learned Single Judge, having noted the provisions of Section 68 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 disposed of the writ petition, directing the Tahsildar, Anekal Taluk, to take action to remove any encroachment only in accordance with law. If the provisions contained in Section 68 of the Act are required to be followed, then the Tahsildar must take action ensuring due process of law. 5. The learned counsel for the appellants/petitioners submits that the road, which is alleged to have been constructed on a Rajakaluve has been existed for more than 50 years and has been used by public. He contends that the Deputy Commissioner has directed the Tahsildar to remove the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20122-DB WA No. 949 of 2026 said road without holding any inquiry as contemplated under Section 68 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. 6. On the other hand Mr. G S Aruna, learned High Court Government Pleader pointed out the village map, which clearly depicts that the road which is being sought for removal is shown as Rajakaluve. 7. We are not sure that who laid this road over Rajakaluve, whether it was the Government Authorities or some private individuals. Even if Government Authorities laid the road, the road cannot be constructed over the Rajakaluve, the water channels are to be restored. 8. Be that as it may, Section 68 of the Act contemplates inquiry. We direct the Deputy Commissioner to hold an inquiry involving the appellants/petitioners and others. The Deputy Commissioner is directed to issue a notice to the appellants/petitioners and others for hearing regarding their objections to the removal of the road laid over the Rajakaluve. Even if Section 68 is not applicable, a hearing must be given to - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20122-DB WA No. 949 of 2026 the appellants/petitioners and other affected parties, after which a decision has to be taken. 9. The Deputy Commissioner must complete the inquiry within a period of 6 weeks and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law. 10. The parties are directed to maintain status quo in respect of existing road. 11. With the aforesaid directions, the writ appeal is disposed of. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE RKA List No.: 2 Sl No.: 5