- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19673 WP No. 10509 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 10509 OF 2026 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. BENAKA AUTOMATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED NO.721/26, 3RD FLOOR, 18TH MAIN 30TH CROSS, 4TH BLOCK, JAYANGARA BENGALURU-560 041. REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SMT. ANITHA D.C. W/O SRI. SURYANARAYANA K. AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT NO.134, 29TH MAIN H.S.R.LAYOUT, SECTOR-II BENGALURU-560 102. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VASANTH KUMAR H.T., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001. REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. MYSURU CITY CORPORATION NEW SAYYAJI RAO ROAD Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19673 WP No. 10509 of 2026 MYSURU-570 024. REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MYSURU CITY CORPORATION NEW SAYYAJI RAO ROAD MYSURU-570 024. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MYSURU CITY CORPORATION NEW SAYYAJI RAO ROAD MYSURU-570 024. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BOPANNA BELLIAPPA, AGA FOR R1; SMT. M.P.GEETHA DEVI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED LETTER DATED 03.03.2026 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT VIDE NO.ªÉÄÊ£À¥Á/PÀA.±Á/eÁ»gÁvÀÄ/¦DGI.105/2025-26 DIRECTING TERMINATION OF THE TENDER PERIOD AND REMOVAL OF ADVERTISEMENT BOARDS, PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-K AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19673 WP No. 10509 of 2026 ORAL ORDER 1. The case of the petitioner is that, it was granted rights by respondent nos.2 to 4 to install advertisement hoardings in various places of city of Mysuru for a period of six months, which is presently over. It is submitted that there has been an inordinate delay on the part of respondent nos.2 to 4 in finalizing the places where petitioner could put up advertisements because of which, earnings of the petitioner have been hampered. It is submitted that without taking this factor into consideration, respondent no.3 has issued impugned letter at Annexure-K to the writ petition, which is dated 03.03.2026 asking the petitioner to remove the hoardings put up by it. Hence, the present writ petition is filed with the following prayers: "a) Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing the impugned letter dated 03.03.2026 issued by the 3rd Respondent vide No.ªÉÄÊ£À¥Á/PÀA.±Á/eÁ»gÁvÀÄ/¦DGI.105/2025-26 directing termination of the tender period and removal of advertisement boards, produced as Annexure-K. b) Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to consider the representations submitted by the Petitioner dated 08.08.2024, 29.08.2024, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19673 WP No. 10509 of 2026 23.09.2024, 26.09.2024, 07.01.2025, 28.04.2025 and 07.05.2025 vide Annexure-E, E-1, E-2, E-3, E-4, E-5 and E-6 for finalization of locations and extension of time for installation and maintenance of Cantilever and Gantry advertisement boards under the tender agreements dated 14.12.2023. c) Direct the Respondents not to interfere with the Petitioner's tender work relating to installation and maintenance of advertisement boards under Package Nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 within Zone A, B and C of Mysuru City Corporation, Mysuru. d) Grant such other order or relief as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity." 2. Admittedly, the matter pertains to contract between petitioner and respondent nos.2 to 4. The said contract is not specifically enforceable. Further, it is admitted by the petitioners that the term of the contract is already over. It is it's contention that because there was a delay in identifying the places where the advertisement hoardings could be put, the term of the contract has to be extended. The petitioner does not have a vested right for making such a prayer. If the petitioner is aggrieved that the terms and conditions of the contract have not been complied with by respondent nos.2 to 4, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19673 WP No. 10509 of 2026 it is always at liberty to sue them for damages in the manner known to law. 3. For the aforementioned reasons, the writ petition is hereby dismissed reserving the liberty to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court in the manner known to law. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4