Disposed¶37

Sri Siddaiah v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC3 Nov 2025WP/36539/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court (Bengaluru); WP No. 36539 of 2024 (LA-RES); Siddaiah v. State of Karnataka & others; land acquisition; consideration of representation dated 19.06.2024 (Annexure-K); Articles 226 and 227; mandamus; direction to respond within eight weeks; disposed of on 03.11.2025; bench: K.S. Hemalekha; petitioner's counsel Balaraj A C; State counsel Harisha A.S (AGA).

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 19.06.2024 (Annexure-K) and pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law within an outer limit of eight weeks from receipt of a certified copy of the order. ¶37

Sri Siddaiah Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶37

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents should be directed (via writ of mandamus) to consider the petitioner's representation dated 19.06.2024 (Annexure-K), which sought notifications for acquiring the remaining extent of scheduled land and payment of compensation.

¶26

Court's answer

Without adverting to the merits and demerits of the case, the grievance of the petitioner would stand redressed if suitable directions were issued to the respondents.

¶35

Ratio / Principle

The respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 19.06.2024 (Annexure-K) and pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law within an outer limit of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶38

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Single-judge Oral Order of the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, WP No. 36539 of 2024 (LA-RES), filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner, aged about 86 years, sought a writ of mandamus compelling the respondents (State of Karnataka revenue authorities for Hassan District) to consider his representation dated 19.06.2024 (Annexure-K), which requested notifications for acquiring the remaining extent of scheduled land and payment of compensation. The Court expressly declined to adjudicate merits and demerits and held that the grievance would be redressed by issuing suitable directions. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law within an outer limit of eight weeks from receipt of a certified copy of the order. Decided by Hon'ble Mrs. Justice K.S. Hemalekha on 3 November 2025.

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:43890 WP No. 36539 of 2024

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 36539 OF 2024 (LA-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI SIDDAIAH S/O HIRIGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 86 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SAMMUDRAVALLI VILLAGE, VOTE HOLE POST, PALYA HOBLI, ALUR TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT- 573 201.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. BALARAJ A C., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

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

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, (LAND ACQUISITION DIVISION), GATE-3, 5TH FLOOR, M.S.BUILDING, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU- 560 001.

¶14

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN- 573 201.

¶15

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, H.R.P-2, HASSAN- 573 201.

¶16

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:43890 WP No. 36539 of 2024

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. HARISHA A.S, AGA)

¶21

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DTD 19.6.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-K AND TO ISSUE NOTIFICATIONS FOR ACQUIRING REMAINING EXTENT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN THE SCHEDULE BELOW AND FOR PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION FOR THE SAID LANDS., AND ETC.

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider

¶26

his representation dated 19.06.2024 vide Annexure-K.

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶28

despite the representation being submitted in the year

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:43890 WP No. 36539 of 2024

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

2024, the respondents have neither considered it nor

¶32

communicated any decision to the petitioner.

¶33

Learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State

¶34

submits that the said representation will be considered in accordance with law, within a reasonable time.

¶35

Without adverting to the merits and demerits of the case, the grievance of the petitioner would stand redressed, if suitable direction is issued to the respondents. Accordingly, this Court pass the following:

¶36

ORDER .

¶37

i) The writ petition is disposed of .

¶38

ii) The respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 19.06.2024 (Annexure-K) and pass

¶39

appropriate orders strictly, in accordance with law within an outer limit of eight(8)

¶40

NC: 2025:KHC:43890 WP No. 36539 of 2024

¶41

¶42