Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 565 (KAR)

SMT DAKSHYINI v. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

WP/15511/2025 · 2026-03-02

R Devdas

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12564 WP No. 15511 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 15511 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT DAKSHYINI W/O LATE DEVARAJU AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 2. SRI. SUNIL KUMAR.D S/O LATE DEVARAJU AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF GONAKANAHALLI VILLAGE, JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE,-562 114,. BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHIVAPRAKASH M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT OFFICE AT KUNDANA, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE - 562 110. Digitally signed by DHARMALINGAM Location: High Court Of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12564 WP No. 15511 of 2025 2. THE EXECUTIVE MEMBER AGRICULTURAL PRODUCT MARKETING COMMITTEE (APMC) OFFICE AT NO.1, RAJBHAVAN ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001. 3. THE SECRETARY, APMC MARKETING COMMITTEE HOSAKOTE- 562 114. 4. THE TAHASILDAR HOSAKOTE TALUK HOSAKOTE -562 114. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.K.P.YOGANNA., AGA) THIS W.P. IS FILED PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS IN RESPECT OF THE LAND BEARING SY.NO.109 OF GONAKANAHALLI, JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK, FROM THE OFFICE OF THE RESPONDENT NOS.2, 3 AND 4 VIDE ANNEXURE-E DATED 26/12/2024, TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF OF MANDAMUS AGAINST RESPONDENT NO.1 TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER ON THE APPLICATION MADE DATE 20/10/1998 AT ANNEXURE-B AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER On 16.02.2026, the following order was passed: "Finally, two weeks time is granted to the petitioners for compliance of office objections, failing - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12564 WP No. 15511 of 2025 which, the writ petition shall be listed for dismissal on 02.03.2026." 2. Matter is called out. There is no representation for the petitioners. Office objections have not been complied with. 3. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed for non-compliance of office objections. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE rv List No.: 2 Sl No.: 13 CT:PSJ