- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15319 WP No. 877 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 877 OF 2026 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. H S NARASIMHA MURTHY S/O LATE SAMPATHU, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT RANGANATHA BADAVANE, HAROHALLI HOBLI, HAROHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU SOUTH DISTRICT-562 112. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RANGASWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SRINIVASA GOWDA B R.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY PANCHAYATH RAJ DEPT, M S BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALAURU-560001 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU SOUTH DISTRICT, RAMANAGARA- 562 159. Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15319 WP No. 877 of 2026 3. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER HAROHALLI PURASABHA, HAROHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU SOUTH DISTRICT-562 112. 4. THE TAHSILDAR HAROHALLI TALUK, HAROHALLI, BENGALURU SOUTH DISTRICT- 562 112. 5. THE CHIEF OFFICER PATTANA PANCHAYATH, HAROHALLI, BENGALURU SOUTH DISTRICT- 562 11 NOW UPGRADED TO PURASABHA 6. THE JOINT DIRECTOR KANAKAPURA TOWN PLANNING AUTHORITY, KANAKAPURA, BENGALURU SOUTH DISTRICT- 562 117 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SPOORTHI V, HCGP FOR R1 & R2; SRI. M. S. DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R3 & R4; SRI. M. S. MANJANNA, ADVOCATE FOR R5; SRI. YOGESH D. NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR R6) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO. 5 VIDE ANNEXURE G, G1, G2 NOTICE VIDE NO. PA.PAM.HA /TA.SHA/C R/NIL/2025-26, DATED. 14.08.2025, VIDE NO.PA.PAM.HA/TA.SHA/CR/08/2025.26 DTD 25.08.2025 AND VIDE NO.PA.PAM.HA/TA/SHA/CR/08/2025.26, DTD 074.09.2025 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15319 WP No. 877 of 2026 AND FINAL NOTICE ANNX-J VIDE NO.PA.PAM.HYA.TA.SHA.CR/11/2025.26 DTD 20.12.2025. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER The case of the petitioner is that he has renovated an existing building on his property and he has also applied for plan sanction with respondent No.5. However, instead of considering his request for plan sanction positively, respondent No.5 has issued notices dated 14.08.2025, 25.08.2028 and 04.09.2025 at Annexures - G, G1 and G2 to the writ petition asking him to remove illegal construction. It is submitted that the said notices were issued without any inspection. 2. Learned counsel for respondent No. 5 upon instructions submits that if the petitioner were to give a reply to the notices issued, the same would be considered in accordance with law. It is further submitted that the said notices have been issued because there was a complaint by a neighbour. Learned counsel for respondent No. 5 also submits that the request by the petitioner for plan sanction will also be - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15319 WP No. 877 of 2026 considered in accordance with law and appropriate orders will be passed. 3. Hence, the following. ORDER [a] The writ petition is disposed of. [b] The petitioner is granted liberty to submit a reply to the notices issued to him by respondent No. 5. [c] Respondent No.5 shall pass appropriate orders taking into consideration the reply submitted by the petitioner within a period of three [3] weeks from today. [d] Respondent No.5 shall also consider the request of the petitioner for the plan sanction in accordance with law. SD/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE RB