- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19734 WP No. 9546 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 9546 OF 2026 (GM-FOR) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI. ABHILASH S/O BASAVARAJAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/AT CHIKKAMANATI, PUNAJE VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, HOSANAGAR TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577418. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENKATESH SOMAREDDI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST SHIVAMOGGA CIRCLE SHIVAMOGGA-577418. 2. ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST REGIONAL SUB DIVISION HOSANAGAR, SHIVAMOGGA-577418. 3. RANGE FOREST OFFICER HOSANAGAR RANGE, HOSANAGAR SHIVAMOGGA-577418. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 13.02.2026 BEARING NO. Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19734 WP No. 9546 of 2026 A4/BHOOMI/APPEAL/30/2025-26 ISSUED BY THE R-1 VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND RESTORE THE APPEAL AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT R-1 TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL ON ITS MERITS WITH IN THE TIME LIMIT AS FIXED BY THIS HONBLE COURT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER Petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned endorsement issued by respondent No.1 who has returned the appeal on the ground that the appeal papers are not in order. The said order is under challenge. 2. Learned Additional Government Advocate has today produced the original appeal memorandum for the perusal of this Court. Upon careful examination of the same, this Court notices that the appellant has not appended his signature on each page of the appeal memorandum. It is, however, significant to note that on account of the said defect, the appellate authority has not afforded any opportunity to the appellant to cure the defect. On the contrary, the appellate authority has - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19734 WP No. 9546 of 2026 proceeded to return the appeal memorandum at the threshold, without issuing any notice or granting reasonable time to rectify such defect. 3. The procedure adopted by the appellate authority, in the considered opinion of this Court, is wholly arbitrary and untenable in law. The defect, namely absence of signature on each page of the appeal memorandum, is purely procedural and curable in nature. When such minor defects are noticed, it is incumbent upon the appellate authority, acting as a quasi-judicial forum, to notify the appellant and afford a reasonable opportunity to rectify the same within a stipulated time. The failure to adopt such a course and the act of outright rejection/return of the appeal reflects a hyper-technical and unreasonable approach, which defeats the very object of providing an appellate remedy. 4. This Court is of the view that such an approach not only results in miscarriage of justice but also runs - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19734 WP No. 9546 of 2026 contrary to the well-established principles of natural justice, particularly the requirement of affording an opportunity to be heard and to cure procedural defects. The impugned endorsement, therefore, suffers from perversity, arbitrariness, and non-application of mind, warranting interference by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction. 5. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed; (ii) The impugned endorsement dated 13.02.2026 issued by respondent No.1, vide Annexure–B, is quashed and set aside; (iii) The appeal preferred by the petitioner shall be restored to the file of the appellate authority and taken on record; (iv) The appellate authority is directed to adopt a reasonable and pragmatic approach and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19734 WP No. 9546 of 2026 shall notify the petitioner of the defects, if any, by fixing a specific date, thereby affording an opportunity to rectify the same within the time so granted; (v) The petitioner shall, on the date so notified, ensure that all defects as may be pointed out by the appellate authority are duly rectified without seeking unnecessary adjournments; (vi) It is made clear that the appellate authority shall thereafter proceed to consider the appeal on merits, in accordance with law, without being influenced by the earlier endorsement. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 83