Disposed¶47

Sri. Venkatesh v. Deputy Commissioner

High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru – Writ Petition No.35257 of 2025 (LA-RES)

Karnataka HC27 Nov 2025WP/35257/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mandamus; representation dated 10.09.2024 (Annexure-A); actual compensation for land utilised for road widening; Shigaranahalli Village, Holenarasipura Taluk, Hassan District; Deputy Commissioner Hassan; time-bound direction of eight weeks; writ petition disposed without adjudicating merits; Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India; Karnataka High Court; LA-RES; AGA Harisha A.S.; Justice K.S. Hemalekha.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner to consider the petitioner's representation dated 10.09.2024 (Annexure-A) on its merits, in accordance with law, within an outer limit of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. ¶47

Sri. Venkatesh Vs Deputy Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶47

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent-authorities should be directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 10.09.2024 (Annexure-A) seeking actual compensation for land utilised for road widening.

¶36

Court's answer

Without adverting to the merits or demerits of the petitioner's claim, and in view of the Additional Government Advocate's submission, the Court held that the petitioner's grievance would stand redressed if a necessary direction were issued to the respondent-authorities to consider the representation.

¶41

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner to consider the petitioner's representation dated 10.09.2024 (Annexure-A) on its merits, in accordance with law, within an outer limit of eight (8) weeks from receipt of a certified copy of the order.

¶47

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru — Writ Petition No.35257 of 2025 (LA-RES) — Sri Venkatesh s/o Late Lakke Gowda v. Deputy Commissioner, Hassan and others — Oral order dated 27 November 2025 (Hon'ble Mrs. Justice K.S. Hemalekha). Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondent-authorities to consider his representation dated 10.09.2024 (Annexure-A) requesting actual compensation for land utilised for road widening, which had remained unconsidered despite repeated approaches. Without adverting to the merits or demerits of the claim, and on the Additional Government Advocate's submission that the representation would be considered in a time-bound manner, the Court disposed of the petition and directed respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner to consider the representation on its merits, in accordance with law, within an outer limit of eight (8) weeks from receipt of a certified copy of the order.

¶1

NC: 2025:KHC:49526 WP No. 35257 of 2025

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO.35257 OF 2025 (LA-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI VENKATESH S/O LATE LAKKE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, SHIGARANAHALLI VILLAGE, HARIHARAPURA POST, HALEKOTE HOBLI, HOLENARASIPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573211.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI RAJARAMA S., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, OFFICE AT DEPUTY COMMISSIONER’S

¶15

OFFICE BUILDING,

¶16

HASSAN-573201.

¶17

Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶18

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HASSAN, NEAR N.R. CIRCLE,

¶19

HASSAN-573201.

¶20

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD-HASSAN,

¶21

HASSAN DISTRICT-573201.

¶22

ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD - HOLENARASIPURA, HASSAN DISTRICT-573211.

¶23

PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER SHIGARANAHALLI VILLAGE,

¶24

HARIHARAPURA POST, HALEKOTE HOBLI,

¶25

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:49526 WP No. 35257 of 2025

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

HOLENARASIPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573211.

¶28

…RESPONDENTS

¶29

(BY SRI HARISHA A.S., AGA FOR R-1 TO R-4)

¶30

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 10.09.2024 FILED BY THE PETITIONER HEREIN VIDE ANNEXURE-A AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶31

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶32

ORAL ORDER

¶33

Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts

¶34

notice for respondent Nos.1 to 4.

¶35

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 4.

¶36

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent-authorities to consider his representation dated 10.09.2024 (Annexure-A).

¶37

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:49526 WP No. 35257 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

The grievance of the petitioner is that, despite of repeated approaches to the respondent-authorities requesting actual compensation for the land utilized for road widening, his representation is yet not been considered till date.

¶40

Learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 4 submits that the petitioner's representation dated 10.09.2024 (Annexure-A) will be considered in accordance with law, within a time bound manner.

¶41

Without adverting to the merits or demerits of the petitioner's claim and in view of the submission made on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4, the grievance of the petitioner would stand redressed, if necessary direction is issued to the respondent-authorities to consider the same and accordingly, this Court pass the following:

¶42

ORDER

¶43

i) The writ petition is disposed of .

¶44

¶45

NC: 2025:KHC:49526 WP No. 35257 of 2025

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

ii) The respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner is directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 10.09.2024 (Annexure-A) on its merits, in accordance with law, within an outer limit of eight(8) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶48

SD/-

¶49

_____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶50

¶51

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17

Sri. Venkatesh v. Deputy Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Venkatesh v. Deputy Commissioner

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. Venkatesh K Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Govindaraju Vs the State of Karnataka

R. Nanjundaiah Vs State of Karnataka

B Nagaraj Vs State of Karnataka

Smt.Sharadamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Kenchamma Vs the Managing Director Bescom