- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25573 WP No. 15764 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.15764 OF 2026 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MR. PRASANNA S/O THIMMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT GUDUMADANAHALLY VILLAGE, VARUNA HOBALI, MYSURU TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT - 570 025. 2. RAMESH S/O BHEEMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT GUDUMADANAHALLY VILLAGE, VARUNA HOBALI, MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT - 570 025. 3. MANJUNATH S/O BASAVEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT GUDUMADANAHALLY VILLAGE, VARUNA HOBALI, MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT -570 025. 4. NAVEENA B. S/O BOREGOWDA AGED : MAJOR R/AT GUDUMADANAHALLY VILLAGE, VARUNA HOBALI, MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT -570 025. Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25573 WP No. 15764 of 2026 5. SMT. SMITHA R. W/O MADHUSUDHAN AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS R/AT GUDURMADANAHALLY VILLAGE VARUNA HOBALI, MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT -570025. 6. SMT. GEETHA W/O MAHADEVA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT GUDUMADANAHALLY VILLAGE VARUNA HOBALI MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT -570025. 7. BHAVANI P. W/O RAJESH N. AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/O GUDUMADANAHALLY VILLAGE VARUNA HOBALI MYSURU TALUK AND DISTRICT -570025. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. JAGADEESH M.S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU -560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MYSURU DISTRICT MYSURU - 570 001. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25573 WP No. 15764 of 2026 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MYSURUTALUK MYSURU - 570 001. 4. THE THASILDAR MYSURU TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT -570 001. 5. DEAN AND DIRECTOR MYSORE MEDICAL COLLAGE AND RESERCH CENTER MYSURU - 570 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R1 TO R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 REDUCING 20 ACRES OF GOMAL LAND UNDER RULE 97 (4) OF KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE RULES AND GRANTING THE SAME IN FAVOUR OF THE RESPONDENT NO.5 VIDE ORDER DATED 29.09.2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE NO. MYSDC-LND1/202/2025-810502 WHICH IS PRODUCED IN THE ANNEXURE-F; AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25573 WP No. 15764 of 2026 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER 1. In this Writ Petition, petitioners are assailing the order dated 29.09.2025 (Annexure-F), passed by the respondent No.2, allotting the land to an extent of 20 acres for the purpose of establishment of the hospital in the nature of NIMHANS at Mysuru. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners are in cultivation of the land in question which is gomal land and therefore, the petitioners have challenged the order passed by the respondent No.2 allotting land in question in favour of the respondent No.5. 2. Heard Sri. Jagadeesh M.S., learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri. Spoorthy Hegde, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 4. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, that the petitioners are in possession of the land in question, and the land in question is a gomal land and same has been reduced to an extent of 20 acres for the purpose of establishment of hospital by the respondent No.5 and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25573 WP No. 15764 of 2026 therefore, the impugned order at Annexure-F requires to be interfered with. 4. Per contra, Sri. Spoorthy Hegde, learned High Court Government Pleader submitted that, since the land in question is situated in less than 10 K.Ms. from Mysuru City and the land is feasible for the purpose of establishment of the hospital which is for a public purpose and therefore sought to justify the impugned order at Annexure-F. 5. Having taken note of the submissions made by the counsel appearing for the parties, the petitioners claim to be in possession of the land in question. However, except the photographs nothing is shown before this Court as to their possession is concerned. It is also to be noted that, since the petitioners claim to be in possession, they have no locus standi to challenge the order at Annexure-F issued by the respondent No.2, allotting an extent of 20 acres of land in favour of respondent No.5 for the purpose of establishing a hospital in the nature of NIMHANS. In that view of the matter, as the petitioners herein have no locus standi, neither having any right or interest over the scheduled property in Annexure-F - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25573 WP No. 15764 of 2026 which is situated within 10 K.Ms. from Mysuru City is concerned, I am of the view that, the Writ Petition deserves to be dismissed. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as devoid of merits. 7. Pending application if any, does not survive for consideration. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE sac List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9