BYAGADADENAHALLI GRAMA PANCHAYATH KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL v. SRINIVASALU MAJOR R2 & 3 ARE
Case at a glance
- Bench
- B M SHYAM PRASAD
- Neutral citation
- 2026:KHC:27211
Outcome
Disposed of
the petition stands disposed of observing that this
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
- Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BESCOM SUB-DIVISION ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT- 562106 …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO- TO ISSUE WRIT/ORDERS IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS/ DIRECTION/ORDERS AGAINST THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 AND 3…
Judgment
BYAGADADENAHALLI GRAMA PANCHAYATH KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT- 562106 REPT. BY PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER SRI. NAGARAJU B. L. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRAKASH M S., ADVOCATE) AND:
SRI. R. MANJUNATH S/O RAMAPPA MAJOR NO. E-60, BEHIND ACC FACTORY BOMMASANDRA VILLAGE AND POST MUNICIPAL WARD NO. 7 ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT- 560099
SRI. SRINIVASALU N S/O VENKATARAIDU N - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:27211 WP No. 39804 of 2025 HC-KAR MAJOR
SRI. VADLAMUDI SRIHARI S/O V. SRINIVASALU MAJOR R2 & 3 ARE R/AT NO. 404, SRINIVAS EMARALD APARTMENT KISHNAREDDY LAYOUT AECS LAYOUT, A BLOCK KUNDALAHALLI, MARATHAHALLI COLONY BANGALORE-560037
THE MEMBER SECRETARY AND JOINT DIRECTOR OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ANEKAL PLANNING AUTHORITY 'ANNA' NO. 430, HENNAGARA GATE, HOSURU MAIN ROAD BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT- 560099
ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BESCOM SUB-DIVISION ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT- 562106 …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO- TO ISSUE WRIT/ORDERS IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS/ DIRECTION/ORDERS AGAINST THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 AND 3 TO DISPOSE OF THE NOTICE MADE BY THE PETITIONER DATED 07/09/2023 ANNX-F BEARING NO. BYA/GRA/PAM/CR/15/2023-24 NOTICE DATED VIDE - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:27211 WP No. 39804 of 2025 HC-KAR VIDE ANNX-G BEARING NO. 10/10/2023 BYA/GRA/PAM/CR/15/2023-24 NOTICE AND DATED 15/11/2023 VIDE ANNX-H BEARING NO. BYA/GRA/PAM/CR/15/2023-24. THIS FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: PETITION, COMING ON CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioner, a Grama Panchayath, has issued notices to the second and third respondents to ensure that the construction must not be occupied as action is proposed because a residential construction is used for commercial purposes, and the petitioner has not issued just one notice but multiple notices.
The petitioner seeks directions the private respondents to act in terms of the notices. The present petition is filed pursuant to the resolution dated 02.09.2025. This resolution reads that the judicial proceedings must be initiated because none of the Authorities including the police - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:27211 WP No. 39804 of 2025 HC-KAR Authorities and the electricity Authorities have acted against the private respondents and the others who illegal constructions. Mr. M. S. Prakash, the learned counsel for the petitioner, is heard. This Court must opine that if the Authorities have issued notices invoking certain statutory provisions, they must act in terms of those notices and pass final orders as would be permissible and then communicate the orders to the Authorities for needful action, and there cannot be a cause to approach this Court unless there is an order and a failure to comply. This Court, on reading of the petition averments and annexures appended, must also observe that it is possible that this petition is filed because of pending investigation/enquiry Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984, and even then, there would be no cause for any action before this Court.
Operative part
Therefore, the petition stands disposed of observing that this - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:27211 WP No. 39804 of 2025 HC-KAR Court has not examined any aspect of the matter and this disposal shall not, in any matter, foreclose or impede other proceedings that must be in terms of the notices. SD/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE RB
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: the petition stands disposed of observing that this
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 226, 227; Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.