- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34481 WP No. 2959 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2959 OF 2022 (KVOA) BETWEEN: 1. SMT MUNIYAPPA W/O LATE MUNIYAPPA Since Dead By LR's 1(a) SRI. M. RAVI S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS 1(b) SMT. JYOTHI C., S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS 1(c) SRI. C. BASAVARAJU S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS 1(d) SRI. GOPALAKRISHNA S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT NOSENOOR VILLAGE, JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 106. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANGAMESH R.B.,ADVOCATE FOR P1(a to d) AND: 1. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER-2 BANGALORE SOUTH SUB DIVISION, Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34481 WP No. 2959 of 2022 BANGALORE DISTRICT-560 095. 2. SRI.M.MUNIREDDY S/O LATE MUNIVENKATA REDDY AGED 62 YEARS, 3. SRI.VENKATESH REDDY S/O LATE MUNIVENKATA REDDY AGED 62 YEARS, 4. C.N.RAMAIAH S/O CHIKKAVENKATAPPA AGED 77 YEARS, RESPONDENT NOS.2 TO 4 ARE R/AT NOSENOOR VILLAGE, JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT BANGALORE-562 106. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SRINIVAS KUMAR M. HCGP, FOR R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS ON THE FILE OF THE RESPONDENT NO.1 PERTAINING TO INA(APPEAL) C.R.NO.35/2013-14; QUASH/SETASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN INA(APPEAL) C.R.35/2013-14, DATED 21.01.2021 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 VIDE ANNEXURE-Q. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34481 WP No. 2959 of 2022 ORAL ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo, which reads as under; "The LRs of the petitioner humbly pray that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to permit them to withdraw the above petition with liberty to file appeal as provided under Section 3(2) of the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961 before the appropriate District Court, since there is an alternate remedy to challenge the impugned order dated: 21.1.2021 passed in appeal No. INA (APPEAL) C.R.35/2013- 14 passed by the 1st respondent. Petitioner further prays that this Hon'ble Court may also be pleased to exempt the limitation of time of pendency of the above writ petition, as the above writ petition was filed by the petitioner inadvertently, hence this memo praying for withdrawal of the above petition with liberty as prayed for, in the interest of justice and equity." 2. Memo is taken on record. 3. If the petitioner files an appeal as stated in the memo within 30 days from today, the time consumed in prosecution of this petition is considered for the purpose of condonation of delay, subject to all exceptions. 4. In that view of the matter, petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RU, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7