Dismissed¶47

Benaka Automations Private Limited v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC9 Apr 2026WP/10509/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Advertisement hoardings tender, Mysuru City Corporation; termination of tender period and removal of advertisement boards ordered by Deputy Commissioner (letter dated 03.03.2026, Annexure-K); certiorari refused; purely contractual dispute, contract not specifically enforceable; contract term admittedly expired; no vested right to extension; remedy is civil suit for damages; Articles 226 & 227 Constitution of India; Writ Petition No. 10509 of 2026 (LB-RES); High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru; single judge M.I. Arun; Benaka Automations Private Limited v. State of Karnataka and Mysuru City Corporation; writ petition dismissed with liberty to approach Civil Court.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court in the manner known to law. ¶47

Benaka Automations Private Limited Vs the State… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:19673 WP No. 10509 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 10509 OF 2026 (LB-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

BENAKA AUTOMATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED NO.721/26, 3^RD FLOOR, 18^TH MAIN 30^TH CROSS, 4^TH BLOCK, JAYANGARA BENGALURU-560 041. REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SMT. ANITHA D.C. W/O SRI. SURYANARAYANA K. AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT NO.134, 29^TH MAIN H.S.R.LAYOUT, SECTOR-II BENGALURU-560 102.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

(BY SRI. VASANTH KUMAR H.T., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001. REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

¶14

MYSURU CITY CORPORATION NEW SAYYAJI RAO ROAD

¶15

¶16

NC: 2026:KHC:19673 WP No. 10509 of 2026

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

MYSURU-570 024. REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

¶19

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MYSURU CITY CORPORATION NEW SAYYAJI RAO ROAD MYSURU-570 024.

¶20

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MYSURU CITY CORPORATION NEW SAYYAJI RAO ROAD MYSURU-570 024.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. BOPANNA BELLIAPPA, AGA FOR R1; SMT. M.P.GEETHA DEVI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4)

¶23

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED LETTER DATED 03.03.2026 ISSUED BY THE 3^RD RESPONDENT VIDE NO.ªÉÄÊ£À¥Á/PÀA.±Á/eÁ»gÁvÀÄ/¦DGI.105/2025-26 DIRECTING TERMINATION OF THE TENDER PERIOD AND REMOVAL OF ADVERTISEMENT BOARDS, PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-K AND ETC.

¶24

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶26

¶27

NC: 2026:KHC:19673 WP No. 10509 of 2026

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

The case of the petitioner is that, it was granted rights by respondent nos.2 to 4 to install advertisement hoardings in various places of city of Mysuru for a period of six months, which is presently over. It is submitted that there has been an inordinate delay on the part of respondent nos.2 to 4 in finalizing the places where petitioner could put up advertisements because of which, earnings of the petitioner have been hampered. It is submitted that without taking this factor into consideration, respondent no.3 has issued impugned letter at Annexure-K to the writ petition, which is dated 03.03.2026 asking the petitioner to remove the hoardings put up by it. Hence, the present writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

¶31

"a) Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing the impugned letter dated 03.03.2026 issued by the 3^rd Respondent vide No. ªÉÄÊ£À¥Á/PÀA.±Á/eÁ»gÁvÀÄ/¦ DGI.105/2025-26 directing termination of the tender period and removal of advertisement boards, produced as Annexure-K.

¶32

b) Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to consider the representations submitted by the Petitioner dated 08.08.2024, 29.08.2024,

¶33

¶34

NC: 2026:KHC:19673 WP No. 10509 of 2026

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

23.09.2024, 26.09.2024, 07.01.2025, 28.04.2025 and 07.05.2025 vide Annexure-E, E-1, E-2, E-3, E-4, E-5 and E-6 for finalization of locations and extension of time for installation and maintenance of Cantilever and Gantry advertisement boards under the tender agreements dated 14.12.2023.

¶37

c) Direct the Respondents not to interfere with the Petitioner's tender work relating to installation and maintenance of advertisement boards under Package Nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 within Zone A, B and C of Mysuru City Corporation, Mysuru.

¶38

d) Grant such other order or relief as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity."

¶39

Admittedly, the matter pertains to contract between petitioner and respondent nos.2 to 4. The said contract is not specifically enforceable. Further, it is admitted by the petitioners that the term of the contract is already over. It is it's contention that because there was a delay in identifying the places where the advertisement hoardings could be put, the term of the contract has to be extended. The petitioner does

¶40

not have a vested right for making such a prayer. If the petitioner is aggrieved that the terms and conditions of the contract have not been complied with by respondent nos.2 to 4,

¶41

¶42

NC: 2026:KHC:19673 WP No. 10509 of 2026

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

it is always at liberty to sue them for damages in the manner

¶45

known to law.

¶46