- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:900 WP No. 100781 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 100781 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: JNANABHARATHI PRIMARY SCHOOL BHAGYA NAGARA, TALUK AND DISTRICT. KOPPAL, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, SURESH S/O. BAGAMMA DONNI, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, OCC: PRESIDENT, R/O. GANDI CIRCLE, BHAGYANAGAR, TALUK AND DISTRICT: KOPPAL. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. GAYATRI S.R., ADVOCATE) AND: THE TOWN PANCHAYATH BHAGYANAGAR BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER, BHAGYANAGAR, TALUKA AND DISTRICT: KOPPAL-583231. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. B.SHARANABASAWA, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 17- 12-2024 BEARING NO. P.PAM.BHA/HIMBARAHA/2024-25/187 AND ALSO THE NOTICE DATED 20.12.2024 BEARING NO. P.PAM.BHA/ NOTICE/2024-25, BOTH ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT HEREIN VIDE ANNEXURE-P AND P-1 AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDER THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA MANJANNA E Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2026.01.30 10:48:06 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:900 WP No. 100781 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioner has approached this Court seeking judicial review of the endorsement dated 17.12.2024 and the notice dated 20.12.2024 issued by the respondent- Panchayath, whereby the petitioner was directed to stop construction of the school building. Brief facts: 2. The petitioner is a primary school running for several decades. The land in question bearing property No.118, was originally granted by the Tahsildar and subsequently transferred in the name of the petitioner- institution. The petitioner applied for building permission for construction of additional classroom. Initially, a mistake had crept in Form No.3 relating to boundary description. Upon noticing the error, the petitioner sought rectification. After enquiry, the competent authority rectified the mistake and issued a fresh Form No.3 in accordance with the title deed. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted a fresh application for - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:900 WP No. 100781 of 2025 building permission. As no order was passed within the statutory period prescribed under Section 187 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 (‘Act’ for short), the petitioner proceeded with the construction under the impression of deemed permission. Subsequently, respondent issued the impugned endorsement rejecting the application and stop work notice alleging boundary discrepancy and encroachment, without furnishing any inspection report or particulars of violation. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that the earlier defect in Form No.3 was rectified by the competent authority after due enquiry. The impugned endorsement and notice are issued mechanically, without conducting any inspection. There is no material placed on record to establish, encroachment or deviation from the sanction limits. It is contended that the action of the respondent is contrary to Section 187 of the Act and principles of natural justice. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:900 WP No. 100781 of 2025 4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent contends that the petition is not maintainable due to the availability of alternative remedy, that there is a discrepancy in the boundaries shown in the documents and the petitioner is allegedly encroaching upon a public road. Further, it is contended that the respondent is empowered under Section 187 to stop unauthorized construction. 5. Having heard learned counsel on both sides, the point that arises for consideration is: “Whether the impugned endorsement dated 17.12.2024 and notice dated 20.12.2024 can be sustained in the absence of an inspection report or material establishing violation or encroachment”. 6. Upon careful consideration of the pleadings and material on record, this Court finds that: i. The respondent has not placed any inspection report, mahazar, sketch, measurement record or - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:900 WP No. 100781 of 2025 contemporaneous material to substantiate the allegation of encroachment or deviation. ii. The impugned endorsement and notice does not disclose when, why, whom and in what manner any inspection was conducted. iii. Mere assertion of violation or encroachment without supporting material cannot form basis for stopping construction, particularly when the petitioner had obtained rectified documents pursuant to an order of the competent authority. iv. The issue as to whether there is actual violation or encroachment requires factual determination based on proper inspection and verification which has admittedly not been done. v. In the absence of such material, the impugned actions cannot be sustained. However, since the respondent is a statutory authority, it would be - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:900 WP No. 100781 of 2025 appropriate to remit the matter for fresh consideration after due inspection and in compliance with law. 7. Accordingly, the point framed for consideration is answered and this Court pass the following order: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. ii. The impugned endorsement dated 17.12.2024 and the notice dated 20.12.2020 issued by the respondent- Town panchayath are hereby quashed as the same are not supported by inspection report or material indicating violation or encroachment. iii. The matter is remitted to the respondent for fresh consideration of the petitioner's application for building permission. iv. The respondent before taking any adverse decision, conduct a spot inspection after issuing due notice to the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:900 WP No. 100781 of 2025 petitioner and shall pass a reasoned order strictly in accordance with law. v. Until such fresh consideration is completed, the respondent shall not precipitate the matter or take any coercive steps against the petitioner. vi. All contentions are kept open. Sd/- JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA AT/ Ct:VH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28