- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1115 WP No. 103688 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.103688 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. ANNAPURNA W/O MALLIKARJUN KOUJALAGI AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK R.O MIG 12, MAHANTESH NAGAR, BELAGAVI TQ AND DIST: BELAGAVI, PIN 590016. 2. SHIVKUMAR S/O MALLIKARJUN KOUJALAGI AGED 45 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS R.O MIG 12, MAHANTESH NAGAR, BELAGAVI TAL AND DIST: BELAGAVI, PIN 590016. 3. SUNIL S/O MALLIKARJUN KOUJALAGI AGED 39 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS R.O MIG 12, MAHANTESH NAGAR, BELAGAVI TQ AND DIST: BELAGAVI, PIN-590016. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SOURABH MIRJE, ADVOCATE) MANJANNA E Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2026.02.02 10:01:58 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1115 WP No. 103688 of 2025 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001. 2. SAUNDATTI MUNICIPAL PALNNING AUTHORITY SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI PIN-591126. 3. THE TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, SAUNDATTI TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591126, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.ASHOK T.KATTIMANI, AGA FOR R1; SHRI HANUMANTHAREDDY SAHUKAR, ADV. FOR R3 R2-SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITIN IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 19/05/2025 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT THEREBY REJECTING THE APPLICATION NO.SNDT-LBPAS-00002/22-23/CLU FILED BY THE PETITIONER NO.3 VIDE ANNEXURE-A, AND CONSEQUENTLY, DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO POSITIVELY CONSIDER THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER NO.3 DATED 28/05/2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-D TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1115 WP No. 103688 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioners have called in question the endorsement dated 19.05.2025 passed by respondent No.2, whereby, the application filed by petitioner No.3 (Annexure- A) came to be rejected. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1-State and learned counsel for respondent No.3. 3. This Court vide order dated 17.09.2025 passed the following order. “1. One of the reasons for the application of the petitioners to be rejected was the existence of the ITI College and the possible nuisance which could be caused to the petitioner once they develop the property. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the ITI College has already been shifted and no longer functioning at the present location. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that it would be in the interest of justice to permit the petitioners to submit the necessary documents in support of the claim of the petitioners to the respondents, which can be considered by the respondents and necessary orders passed within 15 days from the date of submission. 3. Respondent No.2 is directed to reconsider the application. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1115 WP No. 103688 of 2025 4. Registry to print the name of respondent No.2 with the endorsement served and delete the name of learned counsel Sri.Hanumanthareddy Sahukar, as that appearing for respondent No.2. 5. Accepting the reasons stated in the application, I.A.1/2025 filed for dispensation is allowed. Production of certified copy of Annexure-A is dispensed with. 6. Re-list on 16.10.2025.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has filed a memo along with resolution passed by respondent No.3 in compliance with the order dated 17.09.2025. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that respondent No.3 has passed a resolution in favour of the petitioners, which was forwarded to respondent No.2 and inturn forwarded to respondent No.1-State for approval. It is further submitted that the said resolution is presently pending consideration before respondent No.1. The said factual position is not disputed by the respondents. 5. In view of the application having been considered and answered in favour of the petitioners by way of resolution dated 02.12.2025, the grievance of the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1115 WP No. 103688 of 2025 petitioners in this writ petition stands substantially redressed. Consequently, no further adjudication on the merits of the writ petition is warranted. 6. However, since the approval of the resolution is pending before respondent No.1-State, this Court deems it appropriate to direct respondent No.1-State to consider and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. Pending I.A’s, if any, does not survive for consideration and accordingly, stands disposed of. Sd/- JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA AM/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34