Manojkumar Mahalingayya Muppainmath vs State Of Karnataka on 5 February, 2026

Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur

Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur

                                             -1-
                                                         NC: 2026:KHC-K:1027
                                                     WP No. 203116 of 2025


                   HC-KAR




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

                                     KALABURAGI BENCH

                          DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

                                           BEFORE
                        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
                          WRIT PETITION NO.203116 OF 2025 (LB-RES)
                   BETWEEN:

                   MANOJKUMAR MAHALINGAYYA MUPPAINMATH,
                   S/O. MAHALINGAYYA MUPPAINMATH,
                   AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
                   H. NO. 133, LAL BHADUR SHASTRI NAGAR,
                   NEAR SAINIK SCHOOL, VIJAYAPURA - 586102.

                                                               ...PETITIONER
                   (BY SRI. ABDUL MUQHTADIR, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.   STATE OF KARNATAKA
                        REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
                        URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Digitally signed        4TH FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA,
by RENUKA
Location: HIGH          DR. B. R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
COURT OF                BANGALORE-560001.
KARNATAKA
                   2.   VIJAYAPUR URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
                        REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER
                        BASAVAN BAGEWADI ROAD,
                        VIJAYAPUR-586109.

                   3.   VIJAYAPURA CITY CORPORATION
                        REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER
                        BAGALKOT ROAD, JALA NAGAR,
                        VIJAYAPURA-586109.

                   4.   THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
                                 -2-
                                              NC: 2026:KHC-K:1027
                                         WP No. 203116 of 2025


HC-KAR




     NATIONAL HIGHWAY DIVISION PWD
     VIJAYAPURA-586 104.

                                                 ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. VIRANAGOUDA M. BIRADAR, AGA FOR R1 & R4;
    SRI. S. S. HALALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
    SRI. SACHIN M. MAHAJAN, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
ISSUE AN APPROPRIATE WRIT DIRECTION/S OR ORDER/S A)
ISSUE AN APPROPRIATE ORDER/ DIRECTION/ WRIT IN NATURE
OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AND 4 TO
CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 13-08-2025 VIDE
ANNEXURE-G      AND    H   RESPECTIVELY.         B)    ISSUE    AN
APPROPRIATE ORDER/ DIRECTION/ WRIT IN NATURE OF
MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO CONDUCT
A FRESH SURVEY AS PER MASTER PLAN AND IDENTIFY PROPER
LAND FOR ACQUISITION FOR THE PURPOSE OF LAYING 18 M
ROAD. C) ISSUE AN APPROPRIATE ORDER/ DIRECTION/ WRIT
IN NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2
TO INITIATE LAND ACQUISITION PROCESS UNDER SECTION
69   OF   THE   RIGHT      TO     FAIR   COMPENSATION          AND
TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION REHABILITATION AND
RESETTLEMENT    ACT,    2013.    D)   ISSUE    AN     APPROPRIATE
ORDER/    DIRECTION/    WRIT     IN   NATURE     OF    MANDAMUS
DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO PAY THE COMPENSATION
OF RS. 1,00,000/- FOR DEMOLISHING THE COMPOUND WALL
OF THE PETITIONER WITHOUT FOLLOWING THE PROCEDURES
ESTABLISHED BY THE LAW.
                               -3-
                                           NC: 2026:KHC-K:1027
                                       WP No. 203116 of 2025


HC-KAR




     THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR


                         ORAL ORDER

Learned Additional Government Advocate is directed

to take notice for respondent Nos.1 and 4. Learned

counsel Sri SS Halalli is directed to take notice for

respondent No.2 and learned counsel Sri Sachin M

Mahajan is directed to take notice for respondent No.3.

2. This petition is filed by the petitioner seeking

the following reliefs:

"a) Issue an appropriate order/ direction/ writ in nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 and 4 to consider the representations dated 13-08- 2025 vide Annexure-G and H respectively.

b) Issue an appropriate order/ direction/ writ in nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 to conduct a fresh survey as per master plan and identify proper land for acquisition for the purpose of laying 18m road.

c) Issue an appropriate order/ direction/ writ in nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 to initiate land acquisition process under section 69 of the right to fair compensation and transparency in land acquisition rehabilitation and resettlement act, 2013.

NC: 2026:KHC-K:1027

HC-KAR

d) Issue an appropriate order/ direction/ writ in nature of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for demolishing the compound wall of the petitioner without following the procedures established by the law.

e) Grant costs.

f) Such other relief/s as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and equity"

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the

petitioner is the absolute owner and in possession and

enjoyment of the land bearing Survey No.81/*/9

measuring 5 guntas of Mahalabagayat Village of

Vijayapura Hobli, Vijayapura Taluk by way of registered

sale Deed. Respondent No.2 prepared a master plan for

the city of Vijayapura as per Section 12 of the Karnataka

Town and Country Planning Act, 1961 and decided to carry

out construction work of 30 metres adjacent to ring road

from South to North 18 metres under the master plan

scheme. It is the grievance of petitioner that he has not

received any notice from the respondent No.4. However,

later came to know that some machineries were utilized

and installed and kept in the land by the respondent

NC: 2026:KHC-K:1027

HC-KAR

officials and have already demolished the compound wall

of the petitioner illegally to an extent of 30 feet on

28.07.2025. Again it is contended that on 12.08.2025

respondents came back and took measurements for laying

the drain. This being the state of affairs petitioner gave

representation on 13.08.2025 to respondent Nos.2 and 4,

but the representation has not been considered by the

respondents with regard to the illegal demolition and

alleged laying of the drain. Hence, left with no other

alternative petitioner is before this Court.

4. It is the contention of learned counsel for the

petitioner that since petitioner is the absolute owner of the

property, he has the constitutional right to enjoy the

property under Article 300A of the Constitution of India. If

at all the respondents were to acquire or utilise the

property of petitioner, they are bound to follow the

procedure contemplated in law and the principles of

natural justice. The least the respondents can do is issue

notice, receive objections or explanations, and thereafter

NC: 2026:KHC-K:1027

HC-KAR

proceed further in accordance with law, which has not

been done, as no notice under Section 321 of the

Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 is issued and

no procedure is followed as per the judgment of Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of M.

Chandrakumar and Ors. v. The Commissioner, The

Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike and Ors.

reported in MANU/KA/0073/2024 and other judgments

of this Court. Therefore, it is a clear violation of Article 14,

19 and 21 including Article 300A of the Constitution of

India. Therefore, the petitioner is before this court seeking

consideration of the representations by the respondents.

5. Per contra, learned Additional Government

Advocate representing the State submits that the

submission of the petitioner is not accepted and therefore,

the respondents have initiated process in accordance with

law and submits that if at all the process and procedure is

not followed, they will do so and if any damage is caused,

NC: 2026:KHC-K:1027

HC-KAR

the representations filed with regard to damages would be

considered upon proper verification and enquiry.

6. In view of the said submission, this Court

deems it appropriate to dispose of this petition with the

following directions:

ORDER

i. Petition is disposed of.

ii. The respondent Nos.2 to 4 are directed to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 13.08.2025 and pass suitable orders within an outer limit of 2 months.

iii. If enquiry is to be conducted with regard to the damages as alleged by the petitioner, the petitioner shall be notified, enquiry shall be conducted and by following procedure suitable orders shall be passed.

Sd/-

(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

NJ LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 1 CT:SI