- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3830 WP No. 35650 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 35650 OF 2018 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. BANDIKODIGEHALLI HALU UTPADKARA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE, B N RAGHUNATH, BANDIKODIGEHALLI, JALA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE-562149 2. BANDIKODIGEHALLI HALU UTPADAKARA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, B K MANJU, BANDIKODIGEHALLI, JALA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE-562149 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MAHESH A S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. EXECUTIVE OFFICER BANGALORE NORTH TALUK PANCHAYATH, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, YELAHANKA, BANGALORE-560064 2. PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER BANDIKODIGEHALLI GRAMA PANCHAYATH BANDIKODIGEHALLI, JALA HOBLI, Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3830 WP No. 35650 of 2018 BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE-562149 3. B R MUNIRAJ MAJOR, MEMBER, SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBE DOWRJANAYA NIYANTRANA THADE SAMITHI, BANGALORE NORTH SUB DIVISION, NO.157, BANDIKODIGEHALLI, JALA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE-562149 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M S DEVARAJU., ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2; R3-SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE MEMORANDUM DATED 7.8.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-U ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 7.8.2018 AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: I. Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the Memorandum dated 7.8.2018 vide Annexure-U issued by the 1st Respondent in No.BNG/GO/CR/1097/2018-19 dated 7.8.2018; II. Grant such other relief as deems fit. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3830 WP No. 35650 of 2018 2. A site bearing katha No.218/194 at Bandikodigehalli, Jala Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, Bangalore, situated within the Gramatana area of Bandikodigehalli Grama Panchayath, was granted to petitioner No.1 in the year 1995-96. The katha/mutation of the said site was made in the name of the petitioners immediately thereafter. It is claimed that, from the year 1995-96, the petitioners have been making payment of the necessary property taxes and applied for a plan sanction, which was granted by the Panchayat on 1.3.2014. 3. The petitioner, after obtaining the necessary building license, started construction on the property when there was an objection raised by respondent no.3 in furtherance of which the petitioners were called upon vide order dated 7.3.2018 of the first respondent to stop construction. Subsequent, to the appearance of the petitioners and submission of the necessary document in support of the claim of the petitioners, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3830 WP No. 35650 of 2018 as well as after the inspection of the property in question, respondent no.1 vacated the order of stay on 31.03.2018. Shockingly, respondent no.3 filed the very same complaint that he had filed earlier on 07.08.2018, as regards which respondent no.1, on the very same day, 07.08.2018, issued a stop-work order to the petitioners. It is challenging the same petitioners are before this Court seeking the aforesaid reliefs. 4. Sri.A.S.Mahesh, learned counsel for the petitioners, would submit that respondent no.3 is seeking to cause harm, loss and injury to the petitioners by submitting false and frivolous complaints. The respondent, without ascertaining the veracity and validity thereof, has issued stop-work orders. On the earlier occasion, the stop work order issued on 07.03.2018 had been set aside on 31.03.2018. The said stop work order having been issued on the very - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3830 WP No. 35650 of 2018 same complaint, respondent no.1 could not have again issued a stop work order. 5. Sri.M.S.Devaraju, learned counsel for respondents, submits that in the second order, the issue has again been properly examined and by mentioning the appropriate provision, the order has been passed and no fault can be found therewith. 6. Having heard counsel for the petitioners and counsel for respondents and having perused the papers, it is clear that the complaint which had been filed by respondent no.3 on 01.02.2018 is in pari materia with the complaint which had been filed on 07.08.2018. In fact, on the filing of the first complaint on 01.02.2018, a stop-work order was issued on 07.03.2018, which came to be vacated on 31.03.2018. The same allegations have been made in the complaint dated 07.08.2018. Shockingly, respondent no.1 on the very same date has issued a stop work notice. Respondent no.1, having verified the documents and finding that all the actions taken by the petitioners are as per the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3830 WP No. 35650 of 2018 applicable law, it is rather strange that without advertence to the said order, the present impugned order dated 07.08.2018 at Annexure-U has been passed. There is a complete lack of application of the mind. 7. When respondent no.1 had vacated the order of stay, it could not have sat on appeal/revision over its own order and on another complaint filed could not have passed a stop work order on 07.08.2018. In that view of the matter, I have pass the following: ORDER i) Writ petition is allowed. ii) A certiorari is issued. The stop work order dated 07.08.2018 issued by respondent No.1 at Annexure-U is quashed. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE PRS,List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4