SRI KT NAGARAJA vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53374
WP No. 38558 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010841392025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 25 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 38558 OF 2025 (LB-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI K T NAGARAJA
S/O LATE TEEKAPPA SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
NO. 57, KONANDURU MAIN ROAD,
BEHIND SANTHE MARKET,
KONANDURU POST- 577422,
AGRAHARA HOBLI,
THIRTHAHALLI TALUK,
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.
Digitally
signed by
VANAMALA
N
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ANIKETHANA K.M., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. VARAPRASAD K.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPT. OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND
PANCHAYATH RAJ, M.S. BUILDINGS,
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53374
WP No. 38558 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010841392025
BANGALORE- 560001.
2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
SHIVAMOGGA ZILLA PANCHAYATH,
OPP NANJAPPA HOSPITAL,
KUVEMPU ROAD,
SHIVAMOGGA - 577201.
3. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
TALUKA PANCHAYATH,
THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, THIRTHAHALLI,
SHIVAMOGGA - 577422.
4. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
KONANDURU GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
KONANDURU POST- 577422,
AGRAHARA HOBLI, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK,
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.RAJAYOGA K., HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. A. NAGARAJAPPA., ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH
THE NOTICE/ ORDER BEARING NO.TAPANTI/
OOPRA.5/2025-26/ 835 DATED 09-12-2025 ISSUED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-S.
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53374
WP No. 38558 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010841392025
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE
THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
The question whether the petitioner has
encroached any portion of the land in Survey No.
170/2 of Konanduru Village, Agrahara Hobli,
Thirthahalli Taluk continues notwithstanding a suit
and a writ petition. This Court must refer to the
orders of this Court in W.P. No. 31787/2025, which
is decided on 17.11.2025, to decide on the
petitioner's grievance with the Notice dated
09.12.2025 issued by the third respondent calling
upon the petitioner to remove the illegal sheds
constructed in some portion of the subject land.
2. The petitioner in filing the writ petition in
W.P. No.31787/2025 has called in question the third
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53374
WP No. 38558 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010841392025
respondent’s Notice dated 10.10.2025 with the
allegation of encroachment, and this Court has
disposed of this petition permitting the petitioner to
file documents in support of his Reply dated
11.09.2025 calling upon the third respondent to
consider those documents within a month stipulating
that no action shall be taken to dispossess the
petitioner. This Court has further directed the
petitioner to withdraw the suit in O.S. No.131/2025
on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC, Thirthahalli,
Shivamogga observing that the benefit of protection
against dispossession during the consideration by the
third respondent shall be available to the petitioner
only if the petitioner withdraws the suit.
3. It is obvious from this Court's order that
the third respondent is directed to decide on the
question of encroachment considering the documents
that the petitioner could rely upon. The only decision
that comes about after this Court's order is the
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53374
WP No. 38558 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010841392025
impugned notice which is without an inquiry. The
third respondent has premised the impugned notice
in the assertion that the entire land in Survey
No.170/2 of Konanduru Village is made over to the
Panchayath for different public purposes such as a
ground to conduct weekly/fortnightly/monthly fairs.
The third respondent has also referred to the
petitioner encroaching the land belonging to the
Panchayath to illegally construct a shed.
4. The petitioner's case is that the
undisputed owner of the land in Survey No.170/2 of
Konanduru Village has permitted different villagers to
occupy their land including the petitioner's father
who has constructed a house way back in the year
1970-71. This assertion qua the allegation of
encroachment is not decided. These circumstances
demonstrate to this Court's satisfaction that if the
petitioner asserts settled possession the third
respondent, an officer subject to the Karnataka
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53374
WP No. 38558 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010841392025
Grama Swaraj and Panchayath Raj Act,1993,
proposes to act for removal of the encroachment. This
Court has enabled the consideration of the
encroachment by the third respondent insisting upon
the petitioner to withdraw the suit in O.S. No.
131/2025, which is now withdrawn.
5. This Court must observe that the question
of encroachment must be examined in a properly
instituted suit before the competent Court given the
expanse of jurisdiction under Section 9 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908, but this Court must also
observe that there is a statutory mechanism for
adjudication on encroachments if the authorities,
subject to the Karnataka Grama Swaraj and
Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 propose to take action
against encroachment subject to the decision in a
later suit. The statutory mechanism in this regard is
found in the Karnataka Panchayat Raj [Removal of
Obstructions and Encroachments] Rules, 2011.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53374
WP No. 38558 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010841392025
6. Under these Rules, if there is any
encroachment of panchayath property and there is a
complaint regarding the same, the jurisdictional
Panchayath Development Officer, must inspect the
property and file a report with the Executive Officer,
who, upon receipt of such report, must issue notice
of enquiry as contemplated under the Rules and with
due opportunity as contemplated under the Rules,
must summarily decide on the question of
encroachment. If any person is aggrieved by such
adjudication, the further remedy lies in preferring an
appeal under Rule 5 of these Rules.
7. It is obvious that the third respondent in
issuing the impugned notice dated 09.12.2025
[ Annexure-S ] has not adhered to the statutory
mechanism despite orders of this Court. The
impugned notice is issued without any opportunity to
the petitioner. As such, the petitioner must succeed
but the authorities must also be at liberty to act if
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53374
WP No. 38558 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010841392025
there is any encroachment. In the circumstances, the
following.
ORDER
The petition is allowed quashing the
impugned Notice dated 09.12.2025 observing
that there shall be no effort to disturb the
petitioner's possession until there is a report,
an enquiry and an adjudication as
contemplated under the Karnataka Panchayat
Raj [Removal of Obstructions and
Encroachments] Rules, 2011. The authorities
will be at liberty to initiate such proceedings.
Sd/-
(B M SHYAM PRASAD)
JUDGE
NV