- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2223 WP No. 5776 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 5776 OF 2019 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. SAROJINI K W/O. ISHWARA NAIK AGE 65 YEARS, R/AT SAHANA NILAYA, PADANGADY VILLAGE AND POST, BELTHANGADY TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SACHIN B.S, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYATH BELTHANGADI, D.K. DISTRICT - 574 211. 2. PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER PADANGADY GRAMA PANCHAYATH PADANGADY VILLAGE AND POST BELTHANGADI, D.K. DISTRICT - 574 211. 3. K. NAMADEV PRABHU S/O K. SUNDARA PRABHU AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/A BASTHIPALKE PADANGADY VILLAGE AND POST BELTHANGADI, DK DISTRICT - 574 211. …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2223 WP No. 5776 of 2019 (BY SRI. A. KESHAV BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R3; R1 AND R2 - SERVED) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 9.1.2019 PASSED BY THE R-1 AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THIS 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. Petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: (a) Issue writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order quashing the impugned order dated 9.1.2019 passed by 1 respondent No. Ta.Pam.Be/Le.Sha/A3/2018-19 as per Annexure-A. (b) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant on the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity. 2. The petitioner is alleging that respondent No.3, who is putting up a construction in violation of the plan sanction/building license. The petitioner had approached respondent No.1 seeking for a stay of the construction. The relief sought for initially has been granted, subsequently having been vacated, the petitioner is before this court challenging the said order. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2223 WP No. 5776 of 2019 3. On enquiry, as to whether the appeal is still pending, the counsel for the petitioner submits that the appeal is pending before respondent No.1. Respondent No.3 however, submits that during the pendency of the above matter respondent No.3 has completed the construction. If that be so, there would be no purpose of granting any stay or interim order in the present matter. The appeal would have to be heard on merits by respondent No.1 and necessary orders passed and if found in favour of the petitioner, to cause the demolition of the violated structure, which will be the prerogative of respondent No.1. 4. In that view of the matter, the above petition is disposed of, directing respondent No.1 to dispose of the appeal pending before it within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE GJM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 16