- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27726 WP No. 12834 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 12834 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. KYATHAMARANAHALLI SRI HULLIYAMMA TEMPLE DEVELOPMENT TRUST (R) NO. 1627, TEMPLE PREMISES, KYATHAMARANAHALLI K N PURA, MYSURU -570019. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SRI. SHIVAKUMAR 2. SMT. CHANDRAMMA, W/O LATE MADAPPA, NO. 126, 6TH CROSS, KYATHAMARANAHALLI K N PURA, MYSURU -570019 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MADHUKAR S.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS HOME SECRETARY, VIDHAN SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MYSURU DISTRICT, KRISHNARAJA BOULVARD ROAD, CHAMARAJAPURAM, MYSURU-570005 3. COMMISSIONER MYSURU CITY CORPORATION Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27726 WP No. 12834 of 2025 NEXT TO BANMAIAH COLLEGE SAYYAJI ROAD, AGRAHARA, CHAMARAJAPURAM MYSURU 570024 4. SRI. MUNARWAR PASHA, S/O ABDUL WAHEB, AUTHORIZED PERSON HALEEMA SADIYA EDUCATION INSTITUTION AND MASJID-E-SIDDIQUE-AKBAR TRUST HAVING OFFICE A NO. 1/2A, 6TH CROSS, GAYATHRIPURAM, 2ND STAGE, KYATHAMARANAHALLI, UDAYAGIRI, MYSURU-570019 5. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE MYSURU CITY HAVING OFFICE AT LOKARANJAN MAHAL ROAD, DOORA MYSURU-570010 6. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MAHADEVAPURA MAIN ROAD, OPPOSITE SHANTHI NAGAR, UDAYAGIRI, MYSURU-570019 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHAMANTH NAIK., HCGP FOR R1 TO R3, R5 & R6; SRI. SADDAM R. MULLA., FOR SRI. MOHAMMED TAHIR., ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT AS THIS HON’BLE COURT THINKS DEEMS FIT SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE R-2 VIDE ORDER DTD. 02.04.2025 MYSDC MAG4/MISC/61/2023 (E 228421) WHICH IS HEREWITH PRODUCED AS ANNX-A AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27726 WP No. 12834 of 2025 ORAL ORDER 1. The Petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: 1. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or any other writ as this Hon'ble Court thinks deems fit setting aside the impugned order passed by the Respondent No. 2 vide order dated 02.04.2025 MYSDC MAG4/Misc/61/2023 (E 228421) which is herewith produced as Annexure- А. 2. Direct the Respondent No. 6 and 5 i.e., police Commissioner and jurisdictional police station to keep the premises lock and sealed. 3. Grant such order which this Hon'ble Court thinks deem fit in the pursuit of justice. 2. The Petitioners who is a Trust running a temple claim to be aggrieved by the order dated 02.04.2025 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Mysuru, permitting Respondent No.4 to run educational institution. 3. The submission of learned counsel for the Petitioners is that once earlier when there was an issue raised in relation thereto, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.01.2023 in WP No. 49775/2019 directed the District Magistrate to obtain a report from the hands of the jurisdictional police or the Commissioner of Police, Mysore City and the Commissioner of the Mysore City Corporation and then pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27726 WP No. 12834 of 2025 4. The submission of Sri.Madhukar S., learned counsel for the Petitioners is that despite the said order, the respondents have not considered the report of the police dated 14.02.2025 in which the Police Commissioner has categorically stated that there could be a possibility of a law and order situation arising. This report not even considered in the impugned order dated 2.4.2025, the same is required to be set aside. 5. Learned counsel, Sri.Saddam R.Mulla appearing for Respondent No.4 would submit that the impugned order at Annexure-A has been passed in pursuance of the directions which had been issued by the Division Bench of this Court in the contempt proceedings which had been filed by Respondent No.4 in CCC No.523/2023. He submits that the said police report had been placed for consideration before the Division Bench and the Division Bench had categorically come to a conclusion that it is the duty of the police to maintain law and order and remove any obstruction and nuisance and it is in pursuance thereto that the report has been rejected by the Division Bench by way of the order dated 18.03.2025. The District Collector passed the impugned order dated 02.04.2025. He therefore submits that the police report has been considered by the Division Bench. The same cannot be re-agitated before this Court in the present petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27726 WP No. 12834 of 2025 6. A perusal of the daily orders passed in CCC No.523/2023 by the Division Bench of this Court, more particularly order dated 18.3.2025, would indicate that the police report had been placed for consideration before the said Division Bench. The Deputy Commissioner was also present before the Court. The Additional Advocate General had represented the accused Deputy Commissioner and had contended that there could be a law and order issue. The Division Bench held “therefore we are of the opinion that in the instant case, if any persons are causing obstruction or nuisance, it is the duty cast upon the Deputy Commissioner / District Collector, Mysore District to remove such obstruction and nuisance and maintain the law and order and also to resolve the issues between the complainant and the accused i.e., issues between two factions in local area of Mysore District. The Division Bench also directed the Deputy Commissioner to convene a meeting to resolve the issues and made it clear that if necessary orders are not passed, charges would be framed. The said order would categorically indicate that irrespective of the report filed by the Commissioner of Police, the Division Bench has held that it would be the duty of the Deputy Commissioner / District Collector to remove obstruction and maintain law and order. It is in pursuance thereto that the impugned order has been passed. When the police report has been virtually rejected by the Division Bench of this Court resulting in the impugned order being - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27726 WP No. 12834 of 2025 passed, the submission of the learned counsel for Respondent No.3 that the same cannot be re-agitated before this Court is required to be appreciated and accepted. Since the impugned order has been passed in pursuance of the directions issued by the Division Bench of this Court, if at all, the Petitioners are aggrieved by the said directions, it would be for the Petitioners to take such appropriate steps as may be permissible under law. Reserving such liberty, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE PRS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49