- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18739 RP No. 56 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REVIEW PETITION NO.56 OF 2026 BETWEEN: 1. SRI M MAHADEV S/O B MADAIAH AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS R/AT NO. 126 ALLGUDU VILLAGE POST T. NARASIPURA TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT -571124. …PETITIONER (BY SRI/SMT. CHRISTOPHER NOEL A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA SECRETARY TO ANIMAL HUSBADRY AND FISHERY DEPARTMENT AMBEDKAR VEEDHI M S BUILDING BENGALURU -560001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF FISHERY 3RD FLOOR PODIUM BLOCK VISHVESHWARAIAH KENDRA DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU -560001. Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18739 RP No. 56 of 2026 3. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF FISHERY GRADE -II T NARASIPURA TALUK AND POST MYSURU DISTRICT-571124. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.K. KENCHEGOWDA, AGA ) THIS RP IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLVII RULE 1 R/W SEC.114 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.12.2025 IN WP NO.9018/2021 (GM-RES) ON THE FILE OF THIS HONBLE COURT AND ALLOW THIS REVIEW PETITION AND REHEAR THE WP NO.9018/2021 (GM-RES). THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER In this Review Petition, the petitioner is assailing the order dated 11.12.2025 (Annexure-A) passed in W.P. No. 9018 of 2021. 2. Heard Sri. Christopher Noel A., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. H.K. Kenchegowda, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-State. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18739 RP No. 56 of 2026 3. It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the State Government had imposed a lockdown due to COVID- 19, inter-alia, demanded the lease amount without permitting the petitioner to harvest fish in the tank. Accordingly, the petitioner seeks interference of this Court. 4. The learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-State sought for dismissal of the Review Petition. 5. Having taken note of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that the petitioner was unable to pay the amount as demanded by the respondents for the reasons assigned in paragraph 6 of the Review Petition and the said ground is urged in the writ petition. Therefore, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18739 RP No. 56 of 2026 there is an error apparent on the face of the record, and the petition requires to be allowed. 6. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i. The Review petition is allowed; ii. The order dated 11.12.2025 passed in W.P. No. 9018 of 2022 (Annexure-A) is hereby recalled, and the writ petition is restored to file. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 34