Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 238 (KAR)

SHRI UDAY S/O VISHNU REVANKAR v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/107024/2025 · 2026-02-09

Lalitha Kanneganti

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1819 WP No. 107024 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO.107024 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SHRI. UDAY S/O. VISHNU REVANKAR, AGE. 53 YEARS, OCC. ADVOCATE, R/O. #432/A/1/1/, “VIMLESHWAR” BUILD, PAWAR COMPOUND, VACCINE DEPORT ROAD, TILAKWADI, BELAGAVI, TQ. AND DIST. BELAGAVI-500006. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANTOSH B.RAWOOT, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, CITY CORPORATION BELAGAVI-01. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GIRIJA S.HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1; SMT. SHWETA KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 (ABSENT)) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A) ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTIONS, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 09-06-2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-D, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. B) PASS ANY SUCH APPROPRIATE ORDERS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT, JUST AND PROPER IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THIS CASE, IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1819 WP No. 107024 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer: “PRAYER Wherefore the petitioner most humbly prays before this Hon’ble Court that; a) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other writ or directions, directing the respondent No.2 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 0906-2025 Vide Annexure-D, in the interest of justice and equity. b) Pass any such appropriate orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit, just and proper in the circumstance of this case, in the ends of justice and equity.” 2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the owner of CTS.No.432/A/1/1 situated at Tilakwadi, Belagavi. It is the grievance of the petitioner that one Kishore D.Haldankar who was in front of the house of the petitioner intentionally put his overhead rain water canal in such a way that all the rain water of the entire house falling in the property of the petitioner. Due to this act, the first floor slab and gate of the petitioner was damaged. Hence, in this regard, the petitioner had requested the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1819 WP No. 107024 of 2025 neighbor and as he did not respond, the petitioner made a representation on 23.07.2024 to the Assistant Executive Engineer City Corporation, Belagavi, as well as respondent No.2. When the request of the petitioner was not considered, the petitioner made another representation on 09.06.2025. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the respondent No.2 is not considering the representation made by the petitioner. 3. Though vakalath is filed, there is no representation on behalf of respondent No.2. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, perused the material on record. Considering the fact that a representation is given to respondent No.2 and the fact that it is the duty of the respondents to consider the representation in accordance with law and they have failed to consider the same which is given in the month of June 2025. Hence, this Court deems it appropriate to pass the following order: ORDER i. The respondent No.2 shall consider the representation dated 09.06.2025 in accordance - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1819 WP No. 107024 of 2025 with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. ii. This Court is not proposing to issue notice to respondent No.2 as no adverse orders are passed and the direction to respondent No.2 is to pass orders in accordance with law after hearing the concerned. iii. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. iv. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed. Sd/- JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MEG CT: UMD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3