- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9505 WP No. 10586 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 10586 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. JAYARAM S/O NINGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, 2. H.S.MADEGOWDA S/O H.SIDDEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, 3. BORAIAH.H.S S/O SIDDEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, 4. H.S.SHIVARAMU S/O SHESHEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, 5. PUTTASWAMY S/O MADAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, 6. MAHADEVA S/O SANNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, 7. H.M.MALLESHGOWDA S/O H.D.MADEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9505 WP No. 10586 of 2025 ALL ARE RESIDING AT HULIGEREPURA, MALAGARANAHALLI POST, MANDYA-571 428 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. CHETHAN D.T, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER MUJARAYI DEPARTMENT NO.633, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR, MAIN ROAD, MAIN ROAD, MANDYA-571 401 2. THE THASILDAR MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571 428 3. SMT.GOWRAMMA W/O LATE.BASAPPAJI AGED ABOUT 90 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHUNCHANAHALLI KASABA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571 811 4. SMT. SARASA W/O H.M. MALAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS HULIGEREPURA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571 428 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. SESHU, HCGP FOR R1 & R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE R- 1 TO RESTORE THE LAND IN THE NAME OF DEITY VIZ BASAVESHWARD DEVARU WITH RESPECT TO SY N. 41 MEASURING AN EXTENT OF 3-27 GUNTAS SITUATED AT - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9505 WP No. 10586 of 2025 HULIGEREPURA, KASABA HOLBI MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DIST TRANSFERRED IN THE NAME OF THE R-3. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER 1. On the previous date of hearing, the following order was passed: "Finally, a week's time is granted for compliance of office objections. If office objections are not complied, list this matter on 17.02.2026 for dismissal. " 2. The matter is called out. Although there is representation for the petitioners, the office objections have not been complied with. Consequently, the writ petition stands dismissed for non-compliance of office objections. SD/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE PKS/List No.: 2 Sl No.: 4