- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6786 WP No. 52486 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 52486 OF 2019 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. BELLE ARAVIND SHARMA S/O LATE VASANTHA SHARMA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, HOUSE NO.4-20, PAVANJE VILLAGE, HALEANGADI-574146, MANGALORE TALUK, D.K. 2. GANESH AITHAL MAJOR, PAVANJE VILLAGE, MANGALURU TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTICT-574 146. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. CHANDRANATH ARIGA K., ADVOCATE) AND: THE COMMISSIONER, MANGALORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY URVA STORES, ASHOK NAGAR-575006, MANGALORE, D.K. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. HAREESH BHANDARY T., ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 20.11.2019 IN ORDER (ANNEXURE-D) REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER MUDA MANGALORE AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6786 WP No. 52486 of 2019 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs; a. Quashing the Order dated 20.11.2019 in Order No. MNPR/NYOS/VINYAS/368/2012-13 (Annexure-D), represented by the Commissioner, MUDA, Mangalore. b. Grant Such other relief as this Hon'ble court deem fit to grant. 2. The main grievance of petitioners is that no notice had been issued to petitioner No.1 before the impugned order dated 20.11.2019 had been passed. Petitioner No.1 had subsequently sold the property to petitioner No.2 who had been brought on record thereafter. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 on instructions submits that there is no notice which had been issued but however submits that the impugned order dated 20.11.2019 at Annexure-D may be read down as a show-cause notice directing the petitioners to reply. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6786 WP No. 52486 of 2019 4. Considering that the impugned order was passed on 20.11.2019 and there may be many facts which might have occurred during the interregnum, I am of the considered opinion that at this stage it would not be proper to read down the order dated 20.11.2019 as a show-cause notice. Admittedly the said order having been passed without notice to the petitioner is not sustainable. As such, I pass the following; ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. ii. The impugned order dated 20.11.2019 bearing No.MNPR/NYOS/VINYAS/368/2012-13 at Annexure-D passed by respondent is quashed. iii. Liberty is reserved to respondent to issue fresh notice and take up such proceedings as may be permissible under law in the current circumstances. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE SR/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9