- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22191 WP No. 7191 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 7191 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. H.M.S. EDUCATION SOCIETY (R) SHETTIHALLI ROAD TUMKUR-572 102. REP BY CHAIRMAN SRI. SHAFI AHAMED. REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA SOCIETIES ACT, 1960. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. H.L.PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TUMKUR DISTRICT TUMKUR-572 101. 3. THE COMMISSIONER TUMKUR CITY CORPORATION TUMKUR-572 101. Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22191 WP No. 7191 of 2025 4. THE COMMISSIONER TUMKUR URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TUMKUR-572 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SPOORTHI V., HCGP FOR R1 & R2; SRI. R.SUBRAMANYA, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI. T.P.VIVEKANANDA, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO TAKE NECESSARY ACTION FOR SANCTION OF ADJACENT CIVIC AMENITY SITE MEASURING 70 X 330 FEET RESERVED FOR AUDITORIUM AND LIBRARY IN THE ARALIMARAPALYA, RESIDENTIAL LAYOUT, TUMKUR FORMED UNDER IDSMT SCHEME IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER SOCIETY BY CONSIDERING THE RECOMMENDATION LETTER DATED 06.01.2000 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 AT ANNEXURE-H £ÀA.£À¸ÀvÀÄ:LrJ¸ïJA.n:¹Dgï:50:90-2000 AND ALSO BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATIONS NO.HMS 2025 DATED 16.01.2025 AND 11.02.2025 AT ANNEXURES-K AND L. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, 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:22191 WP No. 7191 of 2025 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner had requested allotment of a site in favour of it by respondent no.3. As it's request was not considered the present petition is filed with a prayer to issue a writ of mandamus directing respondent no.3 to consider his request. 2. Learned counsel for respondent no.3 upon instructions submits that request of the petitioner has been considered and rejected and she has produced an endorsement dated 22.04.2026 on this regard. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits he may be granted liberty to challenge the same in the manner known to law. 4. As the request to the petitioner has been considered and rejected by respondent no.3, the writ petition stands dismissed as infructuous. 5. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to challenge the endorsement issued by respondent no.3, if it is so advised. SD/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE PGG