Disposed¶32

Sri. P. a. Puttaswamy Gowda v. the Tahsildar

Karnataka HC12 Aug 2025WP/24117/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WP No. 24117 of 2025 (KLR-RES), P. A. Puttaswamy Gowda v. Tahsildar Mudigere Taluk; encroachment notice treated as show cause notice; natural justice/opportunity of hearing; Articles 226 & 227; disposed of with directions; no precipitative action until final orders; Karnataka High Court, 12 August 2025, R Devdas J.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of: impugned notice (Annexure-F) to be treated as a show cause notice; 15 days granted to the petitioner to reply; respondent-Tahsildar to consider the reply and act only in accordance with law; no precipitative action against the petitioner until final orders; Additional Government Advocate permitted to file memo of appearance within four weeks. ¶32

Sri. P. a. Puttaswamy Gowda Vs the Tahsildar — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶32

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice/order dated 28/07/2025 (Annexure-F) issued by the respondent-Tahsildar in Case No. M.A.G(E)CR.UN NUMBERED/25-26, whereby the petitioner was concluded to have encroached upon government property without an opportunity of hearing, should be quashed.

¶26

Court's answer

Accepting the Additional Government Advocate's submission, the writ petition is disposed of and the impugned notice at Annexure-F is to be treated as a show cause notice issued by the respondent-Tahsildar.

¶32

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is given 15 days from the date of the order to submit a reply to the show cause notice.

¶32

Key takeaways

The respondent-Tahsildar shall consider the petitioner's reply and take action only in accordance with law.ratio¶32
Until final orders are passed by the respondent-Tahsildar considering the petitioner's reply, no precipitative action shall be taken against the petitioner.ratio¶32-33
The learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within four weeks from the date of the order.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka HC (R Devdas J., 12-08-2025) disposed of a writ petition under Articles 226 & 227 filed by P. A. Puttaswamy Gowda against the Tahsildar, Mudigere Taluk, challenging the order/notice dated 28/07/2025 in Case No. M.A.G(E)CR.UN NUMBERED/25-26 (Annexure-F) by which the petitioner was concluded to have encroached on government property without a hearing. The notice was ordered to be treated as a show cause notice; the petitioner was given 15 days to reply; the Tahsildar was directed to consider the reply and act only in accordance with law, with no precipitative action against the petitioner until final orders.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:31159 WP No. 24117 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 24117 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI. P. A. PUTTASWAMY GOWDA LATE P. L. ANNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/A PATTADURU, KASABA HOBLI, MUDIGERE TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 132.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. M. C. JAYAKIRTHI., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE TAHSILDAR MUDIGERE TALUK, TALUK ADALITHA SOUDHA, MUDIGERE,

¶15

Digitally signed by DHARMALINGAM Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 132. …RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SMT. B. P. RADHA., AGA)

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS FROM THE OFFICE OF THE RESPONDENT IN CASE NO.M.A.G(E)CR.UN NUMBERED/25-26 AS PER ANNEXURE-F AND QUASH THE ORDER DATED 28/07/2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT IN CASE NO.M.A.G(E)CR.UN NUMBERED/25-26 AS PER ANNEXURE-F AND ETC.

¶19

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC:31159 WP No. 24117 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

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

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for all the respondents.

¶26

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that although the impugned notice at Annexure-F is styled as notice, nevertheless, the tenor of the notice makes it very clear that without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the respondent-Tahsildar has come to a conclusion that the petitioner has encroached upon the government property.

¶27

Learned Additional Government Advocate would submit that the impugned notice may be treated as a show cause notice given to the petitioner while giving reasonable time to the petitioners to give a reply to the show cause notice and thereafter a direction may be issued to the Tahsildar to proceed in accordance with law.

¶28

¶29

NC: 2025:KHC:31159 WP No. 24117 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

Accepting the submissions made by the learned

¶32

Additional Government Advocate, the writ petition stands disposed of while directing the petitioner to treat the impugned notice at Annexure-F, as a show cause notice issued by the respondent-Tahsildar. 15 days time is given to the petitioner from today to give a reply to the show cause notice. The respondent-Tahsildar shall consider the reply that would be given by the petitioner and take action only in accordance with law. Needless to observe that until final orders are passed by the respondent-Tahsildar considering the reply that would be given by the petitioner, no precipitative action shall be taken against

¶33

the petitioner.

¶34

Learned Additional Government Advocate is

¶35

permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today.

¶36

Sd/(R DEVDAS) JUDGE

¶37

DL CT: JL

Sri. P. a. Puttaswamy Gowda v. the Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. P. a. Puttaswamy Gowda v. the Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri T S Nagesh Vs State of Karnataka

Savithramma Vs State of Karnataka

Sri P K Shivaram Vs State of Karnataka

Appayyanna Vs State of Karnataka

Harish K .B Vs State of Karnataka

Anjinamma Vs State of Karnataka