C NAGARAJ vs PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57139
WP No. 32773 of 2025
C/W WP No. 34396 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010712022025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 12 DAY OF OCTOBER 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 32773 OF 2025 (LB-RES)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO. 34396 OF 2025 (LB-RES)
IN WP No. 32773/2025
BETWEEN:
1. C NAGARAJ
AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS,
S/O LATE M CHANDRASHEKARAIAH,
2. C NAGESH
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
S/O LATE M CHANDRASHEKARAIAH,
3. C MALLIKARANI
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
D/O LATE M CHANDRASHEKARAIAH,
ALL RESIDING AT NO. 1259,
BESIDE MDCC BANK, MAIN ROAD,
BELAKAVADI VILLAGE AND POST,
MALAVALLI TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT 571 417.
…PETITIONERS
Digitally
signed by
VANAMALA
N
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57139
WP No. 32773 of 2025
C/W WP No. 34396 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010712022025
(BY SRI. B.N. MAHESH CHANDRA., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. MANIKANTA H B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. EXECUTIVE OFFICER
OFFICE OF TALUK PANCHAYAT,
MALAVALLI TALUK MALAVALLI,
MANDYA DISTRICT 571 430.
2. PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
OFFICE OF BELAKAVADI
GRAM PANCHAYAT
BELAKAVADI VILLAGE AND POST,
MALAVALLI TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT 571 417.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.M.S. DEVARAJU., ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO 1)
QUASHING THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE 1ST
BEARING RESPONDENT IN PROCEEDINGS NO-
THAPAM-VNIM7- BE. KHATHE- CR-01-2025-26 NOTICE
DATED 21.10.25 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A A1 AND
A2 IN SO FAR AS PETITIONERS CONCERN ONLY.
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57139
WP No. 32773 of 2025
C/W WP No. 34396 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010712022025
IN WP NO. 34396/2025
BETWEEN:
1. C NAGARAJ
AGE ABOUT 74 YEARS
S/O LATE M CHANDRASHEKARAIAH
2. C NAGESH
AGE ABOUT 65 YEARS
S/O LATE M CHANDRASHEKARAIAH
3. C MALLIKARANI
AGE ABOUT 60 YEARS
D/O LATE M CHANDRASHEKARAIAH
ALL ARE R/A AT NO 1259
BESIDE MDCC BANK MAIN ROAD
BELAKAVAEDI VILLAGE AND POST
MALAVALLIL TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571417
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. B.N. MAHESH CHANDRA., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. MANIKANTA H B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
OFFICE OF BELAKAVADI GRAM PANCHAYAT
BELAKAVADI VILLAGE AND POST
MALAVALLITALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
2. SRI VENKATAPPA
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57139
WP No. 32773 of 2025
C/W WP No. 34396 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010712022025
AGE MAJOR PRESIDENT
GRAM PANCHAYAT BELAKAVADI MALAVALLI
TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
3. SMT ANITHA P
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGE MAJOR VICE PRESIDENT
GRAM PANCHAYAT BELAKAVADI
MALAVALLI TALUKMANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
4. SRI CHETAN KUMAR B S
FATHER’S NAMEK NOT KNOWN
AGE MAJOR MEMBER GRAM PANCHAYAT
BELAKAVADI MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
5. SMT ROOPA
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGE MAJOR MEMBER GRAMA PANCHAYAT
BELAKAVADI MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
6. SMT DODDASIDDAMMA
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
MAJOR MEMBER GRAM PANCHAYAT
BELAKAVADI MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
7. SRI GIRISH
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGE ABOUT MAJOR MEMBER
GRAMA PANCHAYAT BELAKAVADI
MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57139
WP No. 32773 of 2025
C/W WP No. 34396 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010712022025
8. SRI SRINIVASA
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGED MAJOR MEMBER
GRAM PANCHAYAT BELAKAVADI
MALAVALLI TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
9. SMT SUMA M N
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN AGED MAJOR
MEMBER GRAM PANCHAYAT
BELAKAVADI MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
10. SMT SAVITHA P
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGED MAJOR MEMBER GRAM PANCHAYAT
BELAKAVADI MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
11. SRI PRASHANTH S
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGED MAJOR MEMBER
GRAM PANCHAYAT BELAKAVADI
MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
12. SRI PRAKASH
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGED MAJOR MEMBER GRAM PANCHAYAT
BELAKAVADI MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
13. SMT LAKSHMI G
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGED MAJOR MEMBER
GRAM PANCHAYAT BELAKAVADI
MALAVALLI TALUK
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57139
WP No. 32773 of 2025
C/W WP No. 34396 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010712022025
MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
14. SMT SHUBHASHINI S
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN AGED MAJOR
MEMBER GRAM PANCHAYAT
BELAKAVADI MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
15. SMT SHARADAMMA
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN AGED MAJOR
MEMBER GRAM PANCHAYAT BELAKAVADI
MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
16. SRI MAHESHA
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN AGED MAJOR
MEMBER GRAM PANCHAYAT BELAKAVADI
MALAVALLI TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
17. SRI MARIMADAIAH D
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGED MAJOR MEMBER
GRAM PANCHAYAT BELAKAVADI
MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
18. SRI SHIVAMURTHY S
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN AGED MAJOR
MEMBER GRAM PANCHAYAT
BELAKAVADI MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
19. SMT UMA K T
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGED MAJOR MEMBER GRAM PANCHAYAT
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57139
WP No. 32773 of 2025
C/W WP No. 34396 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010712022025
BELAKAVADI MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
20. SRI ASHWATH KUMAR S
S/O SIDDASHETTY
AGED MAJOR R/AT BELAKAVADI VILLAGE
MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT 571417.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. DEVARAJA M.S.., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
VIDE ORDER DATED 17.11.2025;
R2 TO R20 DELETED)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
(1) QUASHING THE PANCHAYAT RESOLUTION NO.7
DATED 15/09/2025 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A.
THESE PETITIONS, 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
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57139
WP No. 32773 of 2025
C/W WP No. 34396 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010712022025
ORAL ORDER
These petitions are by the common petitioners
who assert title and interest in immovable properties
with different revenue entries within the limits of
Belakavadi Grama Panchayat, Belakavadi Village,
Malavalli Taluk, Mandya District, and the petitioners’
grievance is with the Gram Panchayat's decision to
cancel the revenue entries insofar as it relates to one
portion of this property.
2. The petitioners have filed the first writ
petition in W.P. No.32773/2025 calling in question
the institution of the proceedings for removal of
encroachment, and in the second writ petition in
W.P. No.34396/2025, the petitioners have called in
question the Resolution to cancel the revenue entries.
The petitioners’ case is that their predecessors-in-
interest have purchased these properties within the
Gram Panchayath limits under certain Sale Deeds
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57139
WP No. 32773 of 2025
C/W WP No. 34396 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010712022025
executed in the year 1920s and a Sale Certificate
issued in the year 1956.
3. The petitioners assert that the properties
owned by them comprises of multiple constructions
and over a period these properties have been given
different survey Katha numbers. The petitioners
assert interest and possession of the properties which
are presently given the following Katha Nos for the
corresponding measurements.
Sl No. Katha Nos The Corresponding
measurements
640-605A 64’ x 21’,
55’ x 16.5’,
129’ x 45’ and
21’ x 14’,
640-605 21’ x 29.5’, and
6’ x 21’
641-606B 11.5’ x 32¼’.
The first respondent, by a unanimous Resolution
dated 22.10.2025 [ Annexure-A ] has resolved to cancel
these revenue entries. The petitioner is furnished
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57139
WP No. 32773 of 2025
C/W WP No. 34396 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010712022025
with a copy of the resolution under the Right to
Information Act, 2005.
4. Sri. B.N. Mahesh Chandra, the learned
counsel for the petitioners, submits that no
proceedings can be initiated for removal of alleged
encroachment in the light of the Sale Deeds and the
Sale Certificate that the petitioners rely upon, and if
the proceedings for examination of encroachment
cannot be initiated, there cannot be any decision to
cancel the revenue entries in favour of the
petitioners.
5. Sri. M. S. Devaraju, the learned counsel
for the first respondent, invites this Court's attention
to the provisions of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj
[Removal of Constructions and Encroachments]
Rules, 2011 [for short, ‘the Rules’ ] and submits that:
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57139
WP No. 32773 of 2025
C/W WP No. 34396 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010712022025
the proceedings which is called in question in
the writ petition in W.P. No.34396/2025 is for
an enquiry as contemplated under the Rules,
the Executive Officer will hear the petitioners
and the concerned Panchayath Development
Officer [PDO] and decide on the encroachment
of the kind as mentioned in Rule 4[3] of the
Rules, and
if the petitioners are aggrieved by such decision,
they can avail the appellate remedy under Rule
5 of the Rules.
6. This Court must observe that the
proceedings under the Rules will have to be preceded
by an inspection by the PDO resulting in a Report.
The records do not mention that there was such
inspection or Report by the PDO. The question of
encroachment by the petitioners will have to be
essentially after an inspection and a Report subject to
enquiry under Rule 4 of the Rules and the appellate
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57139
WP No. 32773 of 2025
C/W WP No. 34396 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010712022025
remedy under Rule 5 of the Rules. As the impugned
notices do not refer to the inspection or the Report,
this Court must pass just orders in the writ petition
in W.P. No.32773/2025 to enable inspection and
enquiry so that the petitioners have the advantage of
the procedure and the remedy under the Rules.
7. Insofar as the petitioners' grievance with
the Resolution to cancel the revenue entries, this
Court must observe that the decision to cancel the
revenue entries is a case of putting the cart before the
horse. The decision to cancel the revenue entries
should have been after the conclusion of the enquiry.
Therefore, there is a reason for interference with the
impugned resolution. In the light of the afore, the
following.
ORDER
[A] The writ petition in W.P.
No.34396/2025 is allowed quashing
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57139
WP No. 32773 of 2025
C/W WP No. 34396 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010712022025
the first respondent’s Resolution
dated 15.09.2025 [ Annexure-A ].
[B] The writ petition in W.P.
No.32773/2025 is also allowed but
with liberty to the Chief Executive
Officer, upon receipt of inspection
Report by the jurisdictional PDO, to
institute an enquiry as contemplated
under Rule 4 of the Rules.
[C] It is needless to observe that if the
enquiry is instituted, the petitioner
must be furnished with a copy of the
Inspection Report to facilitate a
complete opportunity.
Sd/-
(B M SHYAM PRASAD)
JUDGE
AN/-
List No.: 3 Sl No.: 7