- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:925 WP No. 30034 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 30034 OF 2018 BETWEEN: AITHAPPA GOWDA S/O. LATE. PAKEERA GOWDA, R/AT KOOCHELU OF HIREBANDADY VILLAGE, PUTTUR TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-574241 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. YATIN B., ADVOCATE FOR LR’S OF DECD. PETITIONER) AND: 1. SMT ANITHA RAI W/O. A U RAI, R/AT NO. 827, 9TH CROSS, 10TH MAIN, INDIRANAGAR, II STATE, BENGLAURU 560038. 2. SMT. NIMMI HEGDE AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS W/O. B K SHETTY, R/AT NO. C-157, KPWD QUARTERS, NEAR POLICE STATION, JEEVANBIMANAGAR, BENGALURU 560075. 3. SMT. POORNIMA L RAI AGED 63 YEARS Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:925 WP No. 30034 of 2018 W/O. LATE. DR. LAKSHMISH RAI, R/AT C/O. B.L RAI’S HOUSE, NO. 90, 2ND MAIN, NEW PADAV ROAD, MANGALURU 575 001. 4. SMT. KALYANI V SHETTY AGED ABOUT 86 YEARS W/O. LATE. P V SHETTY, R/AT LOWER BENDOOR NO. 126, 6TH MAIN, MANGALORE 575 001. 5. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER (LAND REFORMS) AND SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, PANCHAYAT JALAVIDYUT YOJANE, MANGALORE, TALUK OFFICE PUTTUR, D.K- 574201 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. A KESHAVA BHAT FOR R1-R4., ADVOCATE R5 THE AUTHROIZED OFFICER, LAND REFORMS, MANGALURU -SD) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT DATED 19.01.2018 PASSED BY KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN APPEAL NO.838/2012, WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G AND CONSEQUENTLY CONFIRM THE ORDER DATED 10.07.2001 PASSED BY THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, (LAND REFORMS) & SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, PANCHAYAT JALAVIDYUT YOJANE, MANGALURU, TALUK OFFICE, PUTTUR, D.K. IN PROCEEDINGS NO.LRF 7.17/1999-2000 AND ETC. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:925 WP No. 30034 of 2018 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER On 19.12.2025 the following order was passed: “Despite granting sufficient opportunity to the learned counsel for the petitioner, he remained absent.” 2. Matter is called out. There is no representation for the petitioner. 3. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE JT/- CT: JL