- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21057 WP No. 53064 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 53064 OF 2018 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: DR K GANESHA BHAT AGED 53 YEARS, SON OF LATE K SHANKARANARAYANA BHAT, R/AT BHAGAVATHPADA DOOR NO. 7-119-30, SADASHIVA NAGARA LAYOUT, YEKKUR BAJAL, MANGALURU - 575 007. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. P.P. HEGDE,SR. COUNSEL FOR; SRI. GAURAV SINGH GAUR, ADVOCATE) AND: MANGALORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY URVA STORES, ASHOK NAGAR POST, MANGALURU - 575 006 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. HAREESH BHANDARY .J. ,ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 16.11.2018 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT/ COMMISSIONER, MANGALURU URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY [MUDA] MANGALURU IN PROCEEDINGS ಮನಾ/ಎ ..ಎ/12/1992-93 WHICH IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE-A. Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21057 WP No. 53064 of 2018 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER 1. A notice has been issued to the petitioner by the respondent directing him to remove the encroachment made by him on public property. Aggrieved by the said notice (Annexure-'A' to the writ petition), the petitioner has filed the writ petition challenging the same. 2. No person has any right to encroach upon public property. If any such encroachment is done, the authorities are duty bound to remove the same. 3. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo dated 13.03.2026, wherein it is fairly admitted that the petitioner has encroached upon public property. However, it is submitted that the petitioner has made a representation to the respondent to allot the said land in his favour. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that he is willing to pay the market price, if the same is allotted to - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21057 WP No. 53064 of 2018 him. He also submits that the encroachment was done inadvertently and was not intentional. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the request of the petitioner will be considered in accordance with law. 5. As already mentioned above, nobody has a right to encroach upon public property. 6. For the aforementioned reasons, the writ petition is hereby dismissed. However, the order of dismissal will not come in the way of the petitioner from making a suitable representation to the respondent for allotment of the land concerned in his favour at market value and if such a request is made, the respondent is at liberty to consider the same in accordance with law. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE VMB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 62