- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22783 WP No. 11530 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 11530 OF 2026 (GM-FOR) BETWEEN: 1. SRI VINOD D PATEL S/O DHANJI PATEL, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS. THE PROPRIETOR OF M/S. MEENAKSHI SAW MILL NO.38, DIVETEGEE RAMANAHALLI NAYANDAHALLI, MYSORE ROAD BANGALORE - 560 039. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHRIDHAR NARAYAN HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO FOREST DEPARTMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST ARANYA BHAVANA MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 055. 3. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, BANGALORE CIRCLE BENGALURU - 560 001. Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22783 WP No. 11530 of 2026 4. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, BANGALORE CITY DIVISION, BENGALURU - 560 003. 5. THE ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, BANGALORE SOUTH SUB-DIVISION, 18TH CROSS KADU MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 003. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS, DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 30.10.2019 AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER FOR SHIFTING OF THE SAW MILL AT THE AREA OF SY. NO.64/4 OF KANIMINIKI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK AND TO RENEW THE SAW MILL LICENCE OF THE PETITIONER AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER Petitioner in the captioned petition is seeking for the following reliefs: "i. Issue a writ of mandamus, direction directing the respondent authorities to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 30.10.2019 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22783 WP No. 11530 of 2026 and direct the respondent authorities to pass appropriate order for shifting of the saw mill at the area of Sy.No.64/4 of Kaniminiki Village Kengeri Hobli Bangalore South Taluk and to renew the saw mill licence of the petitioner at Annexure-G. ii. Direct the respondent authority to keep the existing licence alive and not to declare the licence is expired until the consideration of the petitioner's request by the authority; iii. Pass any other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deemed fit to the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity." 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA. Perused the records. 3. The facts leading to the case are as under: The petitioner, who is the proprietor of M/s. Meenakshi Saw Mill, asserts that he had secured a valid saw mill licence on 26.04.2012 and was lawfully carrying on the said business till the year 2014. It is his specific - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22783 WP No. 11530 of 2026 case that on account of acquisition of the land in question for the purposes of Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited (BMRCL), he was compelled to discontinue operations at the existing location and consequently shift the saw mill. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite submitting necessary representations seeking permission for relocation/continuation of the saw mill in accordance with law, the respondents failed to take any decision. Being aggrieved by such inaction, the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court in W.P. No.26117/2019. This Court, by order passed therein, disposed of the writ petition directing the competent authority to consider the petitioner’s representation in accordance with law. 4. Pursuant to the said direction, respondent No.4 passed an order dated 20.09.2019, wherein it was observed that the request of the petitioner for shifting of the saw mill requires fresh consideration and has to be processed in terms of the provisions of the Karnataka - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22783 WP No. 11530 of 2026 Forest Rules, 1969. The petitioner contends that despite the said categorical observations and notwithstanding submission of a fresh representation dated 30.10.2019 (Annexure–G), the respondents have not taken any further steps, thereby exhibiting clear inaction and apathy in discharging their statutory obligations. It is in this background, the petitioner is once again before this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to consider his representation. 5. Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate, on instructions from the Deputy Conservator of Forest, submits that the petitioner’s representation dated 30.10.2019 would be duly considered in accordance with the applicable statutory framework and that appropriate orders would be passed within a reasonable time frame. The said submission is placed on record. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22783 WP No. 11530 of 2026 6. Having regard to the limited grievance projected by the petitioner, and in the light of the submission made by the learned Additional Government Advocate, this Court is of the considered view that the ends of justice would be met if a direction is issued to the competent authority to consider the petitioner’s pending representation within a time-bound manner. 7. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed; (ii) A writ in the nature of mandamus is issued directing respondent No.4 to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 30.10.2019 (Annexure–G), in accordance with the provisions of the Karnataka Forest Rules, 1969 and other applicable statutory provisions; (iii) The aforesaid exercise shall be completed and appropriate orders shall be - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22783 WP No. 11530 of 2026 passed, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order; (iv) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner’s claim and all contentions are left open to be considered by the competent authority. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 66