- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10060 WP No. 19659 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 19659 OF 2022 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. RAVI A.M S/OLT MANCHAIAH AGED 35 YEARS R/AT NO. 668, 6TH MAIN KRISHNA RIVER ROAD, BRINDAVAN NAGAR, SRINAGAR BENGALURU - 560 050. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GIRISH M.K, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPAREMNT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING DR. B.R. AMEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE DEUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, KANDAYA BHVANA, K.G. ROAD BENGALORE - 560 009. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10060 WP No. 19659 of 2022 KANDAYA BAVHAN, K.G. ROAD BENGALURU - 560 009. 4. THE TASILDAR AND TALUK EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU - 560 009. 5. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHUTH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N.R. SQUARE, BENGALURU - 560 009. 6. JOINT COMMISSONER BENGALURU SOUTH, 1ST BLOCK, JAYANAGARA BENGALURU - 560 011. 7. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER STORM WATER DRAIN DIVISON, SOUTH RANGE, BRUHUTH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE JAYANAGARA COMPLEX BUILDING 4TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BENGALURU - 560 011. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SESHU V, HCGP FOR R1 TO R4; SRI. S.H. PRASHANTH, ADVOCATE FOR R5 TO R7) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE BEARING NO. NCR(U)CR 136/2022-23 DTD.19.9.2022 ISSUED BY TH R-4 VIDE ANNEXURE-A WITH RESPECT TO THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY AND ETC., - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10060 WP No. 19659 of 2022 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER The petitioner and learned counsel for petitioner have filed a memo dated 11.02.2026 seeking leave of this Court to withdraw the writ petition on the ground that the Tahsildar who had issued the impugned notice under Section 104 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 for evicting the petitioner and thereafter, approached the Special Court for Land Grabbing. Therefore, the prayer made in this writ petition has become infructuous. 2. The writ petition stands disposed of as withdrawn in view of the memo filed by the petitioner. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE rv