Karnataka High Court
V P Prasanna Kumar Jain S/O Padmaraj ... vs The Assistant Executive Engineer on 16 March, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:4078
WP No. 100062 of 2021
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M
WRIT PETITION NO. 100062 OF 2021 (LB-UC)
BETWEEN:
SHRI U.P. PRASANNA KUMAR JAIN
S/O PADMARAJ JAIN, AGE. 52 YEARS,
OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. NATARAJ BADAVANE,
HARAPANAHALLI TOWN,
BALLARI DISTRICT-583 131.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. J.S. SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
PANCHAYATH RAJ ENGINEERING SUB-DIVISION,
HARAPANAHALLI, DISTRICT. BALLARI-583 131.
2. TAHASHILDAR,
HARAPANAHALLI,
Digitally signed by HARAPANAHALLI TALUK,
PREMCHANDRA
MR
Location: HIGH
DIST. BALLARI-583 131.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
BALLARI, BALLARI DISTRICT-583 131.
4. TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, HARAPANAHALLI,
BALLARI DISTRICT-583 131, BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. P.N. HATTI, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3;
SRI. KUSHAL.N.KAMBEL, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. GANGADHAR J.M., ADVOCATE FOR R4)
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:4078
WP No. 100062 of 2021
HC-KAR
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN
RELIEFS.
THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS
UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
Sri.J.S.Shetty., counsel for the petitioner, Sri.P.N.Hatti., HCGP for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri.Kushal N.Kambel., counsel on behalf of Sri.Gangadhar.J.M., for respondent No.4 have appeared in person.
2. The petition is filed seeking following reliefs:
"a) Issue a writ of certiorari to quash the notice dated:19.12.2020 issued by the 1st respondent to the petitioner, the copy of which has been produced herewith at Annexure-A.
b) Any other writ or direction which this Court deems fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case, may kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner, by allowing this writ petition, in the ends of justice and equity."
3. Counsel for the respective parties presented several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the papers with care.
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:4078 WP No. 100062 of 2021 HC-KAR
4. The impugned notice regarding the alleged encroachment was issued in blatant violation of principles of natural justice, as the petitioner was denied a reasonable opportunity to submit his contentions. Hence, this Court deems fit and proper to direct the petitioner to submit a suitable reply to the notice. As there is an interim order of status quo by this Court on 08.01.2021, the same shall continue to operate till the consideration of the reply and passing the suitable order by the respondents.
5. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
(JYOTI M) JUDGE MRP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 74