Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 11311 (KAR)

K. J. SWAMY v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/9635/2025 · 2026-03-04

R Devdas

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13111 WP No. 9635 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 9635 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: K. J. SWAMY S/O LATE JAVAREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/AT KARIMARANAHALLI VILLAGE, KENKERE POST, GANDASI HOBLI, ARASIKERE TALUK, HASAN DISTRICT – 573 164 …PETITIONER (BY SMT. JAYALAKSHMAMMA K.B, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HASAN 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, HASAN 4. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR NADAKACHERI, GANDASI, Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13111 WP No. 9635 of 2025 ARASIKERE TALUK, HASAN DISTRICT. 5. ANIMAL AND HUSBANDARY VETERINARY OFFICER, BIDAREKAVALU, GANDASI HOBLI, ARASIKERE TALUK, HASAN DISTRICT. 6. THE THASILDHAR, NADAKACHERI, GANDASI, ARASIKERE TALUK, HASAN DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.B.P.RADHA, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DTD 13.12.2024 ISSUED BY THE R-4 AND 5 IN NO. NA(GM) OTHUVARI CR 51/2024-25 VIDE ANNX-ADIRECT THE R-2 ,3 AND 6 TO CONSIDER THE REP DTD 3.02.2025 DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO MAKE DURASTHI WORK IN RESPECT OF THE SCHEDULE LAND BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER On 18.02.2026, the following order was passed: "Finally, two weeks time is granted to the petitioner for compliance of office objections. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13111 WP No. 9635 of 2025 Failing which, list this matter on 04.03.2026 for dismissal." 2. Matter is called out. There is no representation for the petitioner. 3. Office objections have not been complied with. 4. Consequently, the writ petition stands dismissed for non-compliance of office objections. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE rv List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1