- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19298 WP No. 9508 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 9508 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MUNIYAMMA W/O LATE MADAPPA, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS 2. M MUNIRAJ S/O LATE MADAPPA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS 3. MANJULA A W/O MUNIRAJ M AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS 4. NAGRAJ B M S/O LATE MADAPPA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS 5. CHANNAPPA S/O DODDARAMAIAH , AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 6. SATISH B V S/O VENKATATRAMANAPPA,, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS 7. VENKATARAMANAPPA S/O SAMPANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS 8. KRISHNAMMA W/O VENKATARAMANAPPA, Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19298 WP No. 9508 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS 9. RAMACHANDRAPPA S/O MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 10. CHETHAN S/O MUNIRAJ, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS 11. MOHAN R S/O RAMACHANDRA , AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS 12. G SUNANDAMMA W/O RAMACHANDRA , AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS 13. RAMACHANDRA S/O JAYARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS 14. J MANOHAR S/O JAYARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT BANARAHALLI VILLAGE, DEVANAGUNDI POST HOSAKOTE TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 560067 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. BRIJESH SINGH M.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, NO. 1, PARLIAMENT STREET, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19298 WP No. 9508 of 2025 NEW DELHI 110001. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER (TECH) AND PROJECT DIRECTOR NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA 207, SYNO. 13 K M NAGASANDRA, BANGALORE 560073. 3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY, NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA 207, NO. 618/3, NEERBHAVI KEMPPANA BANAVANE, HEBBAL BNAGALORE 560024. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. AJAY PRABHU M.,ADVOCATE FOR R1; V/O DATED:25.10.2025 SHILPA SHAH FOR R2; SMT. NAVYA SHEKAR, AGA FOR R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TODIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION MADE BY THE PETITIONERS ON 27.01.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE- C FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SERVICE ROAD FROM KM 10 PLUS 000 TO KM 11 PLUS 500 ON THE NEW NH648 (OLD NH 207) BEING CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOUR LANE REALIGNMENT OF OLD NH 207 (NEW NH 648) FROM TAMIL NADU/ KARNATAKA BORDER (CH 0 PLUS 000) TO HOSKOTE (CH 20 PLUS 900) AS PART OF BANGALORE RING ROAD ON ENGINEERING PROCUREMENT CONSTRUCTION MODE UNDER BHARATMALA PARIYOJANA IN THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19298 WP No. 9508 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The captioned writ petition is filed seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent–authorities to consider the representation dated 27.01.2025, produced at Annexure–C, wherein the petitioners have sought for construction of a service road from KM 10+000 to KM 11+500 on the stretch of New NH–648 (Old NH–207), which is presently being developed under the project of four-laning and realignment from Tamil Nadu/Karnataka Border (CH 0+000) to Hoskote (CH 20+900), forming part of the Bengaluru Ring Road project, undertaken on Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) mode under the Bharatmala Pariyojana in the State of Karnataka. 2. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent–National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) has placed on record an endorsement issued by the competent authority of NHAI, which directly addresses the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19298 WP No. 9508 of 2025 grievance ventilated by the petitioners in their representation. The said endorsement is taken on record and forms part of the proceedings. 3. On perusal of the said endorsement, it is evident that the competent authority has duly examined not only the petitioners’ representation but also similar requests submitted by other villagers in respect of the very same stretch of the highway. Upon such consideration, the authority has declined to accede to the request for provision of a service road. The endorsement dated 13.01.2026 discloses that the rejection is not arbitrary, but is founded on technical and feasibility considerations, and reasons in that regard are explicitly assigned therein. 4. Having regard to the aforesaid endorsement, this Court is of the considered view that once the competent technical authority, vested with the responsibility of planning and execution of national - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19298 WP No. 9508 of 2025 highway projects, has taken a conscious decision based on expert assessment indicating that the provision of a service road at the requested location is not feasible, this Court, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, would not be justified in issuing a direction contrary to such expert opinion. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the conclusions recorded in the endorsement, it is open for them to independently challenge the said endorsement in accordance with law. 5. In that view of the matter, reserving liberty to the petitioners to call in question the endorsement dated 13.01.2026, if so advised, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35