[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
K Murali Mohan vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 May, 2026
Author: S Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:24620
WP No. 11528 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MAY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO. 11528 OF 2026 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. K MURALI MOHAN
S/O LATE A.L. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
RESIDING AT ADARSH NAGAR,
MALUR TOWN, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563130
2. G.P. ANJANAPPA,
S/O PUTTANNA,
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
RESIDING AT GUDDANAHALLY VILLAGE,
MALUR TALUK,
KOLAR DISTRICT - 563130
Digitally
signed by 3. RAJESH S,
NANDINI M
S S/O SRINIVAS,
Location: AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
HIGH
COURT OF RESIDING AT SRI LAKSHMI NILAYA,
KARNATAKA BACKSIDE OF JUNIOR COLLEGE,
ADARSH NAGAR,
MALUR TOWN - 563130
4. SMT. VEENA SRI M,
D/O MOHAN,
W/O M. ARUN KUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
RESIDING AT MALUR TOWN,
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:24620
WP No. 11528 of 2026
HC-KAR
KOLAR DISTRICT - 563130
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI SHRIRAM ADIGA, ADV. FOR
SRI. SRINIVAS G., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT,
VIKAS SOUDHA,
BENGALURU -560001
BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
KARNATAKA STATE HIGHWAYS IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT
K.R. CIRCLE
BENGALURU - 560001
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. SARITHA KULKARNI, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (A)
ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS
NOT TO DEMOLISH THE PETITIONERS PROPERTIES WITHOUT
DUE PROCESS OF LAW (B)PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER OR
ORDERS AS THIS HONBLE COURT DEEMS FIT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:24620
WP No. 11528 of 2026
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
ORAL ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
Additional Government Advocate on behalf of the respondents.
2. The petitioners are before this Court under Articles
226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking for the
following reliefs:
a) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents
not to demolish the petitioners' properties without due
process of law;
b) Pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court
deems fit.
3. It is the case of she petitioners that their property
has been acquired for the purpose of formation of National
Highway from Devanahalli to Hoskote. According to the
petitioners, there are certain existing structures in the property
in question and without taking note of the same and even
before an award is passed, the respondent authorities are
taking steps to demolish the said structures.
NC: 2026:KHC:24620
HC-KAR
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners referring to
certain photographs produced along with the petition submits
that the property of the petitioners is already marked and
therefore, they apprehend that the respondents are likely to
take coercive steps to demolish the existing structure found in
the property in question.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate on
instruction submits that the acquisition proceedings is still
under progress and at this stage, the respondent authorities
are not intending to demolish the existing structure found in
the petitioners' property. She submits that if an appropriate
representation is given to the competent authority by the
petitioners, the same shall be considered and appropriate
orders in accordance with law shall be passed within a
reasonable period.
6. The said submission is placed on record.
7. The writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to
the petitioners to submit an appropriate representation within a
period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this
NC: 2026:KHC:24620
HC-KAR
order before the competent authority putting forward their
grievance and the if the competent authority receives such a
representation, the same shall be considered and appropriate
orders in accordance with law shall be passed on the same as
expeditiously as possible but not later than period of four
months from the date of receipt of such an application.
8. In the meanwhile the respondent authorities are
directed not to take any coercive action as against the
petitioners property more so as against the existing structures
found in the petition schedule properties.
SD/-
(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
JUDGE
SSB
