Disposed¶47

The Commissioner v. the Assistant Commissioner

Karnataka HC10 Feb 2026WP/39370/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court 2026; WP No.39370 of 2025 (GM-CPC); Article 227 Constitution of India; writ of certiorari; writ of mandamus; Execution No.449/2025; I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru; Commissioner City Municipal Council Nanjangud; Special Land Acquisition Officer Mysuru Sub-Division; Executive Engineer Urban Water Supply Sewerage Board; Smt. Puttamadamma; land acquisition compensation; Suttur Gram Panchayath; petition withdrawn with liberty; objections before Executing Court; disposed of as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief granted; petition permitted to be withdrawn with liberty reserved to the petitioner to urge all contentions before the Executing Court, which was directed to consider the petitioner's objections and dispose of the execution proceedings in accordance with law. ¶47

The Commissioner Vs the Assistant Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶47

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings in Execution No.449/2025 pending before the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru (Annexure-D1) should be set aside by writ of certiorari, qua the petitioner (Commissioner, City Municipal Council, Nanjangud). +1 more

¶35

Ratio / Principle

The petition stands disposed of as withdrawn, reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to urge all contentions, including the contentions urged in the present petition, before the Executing Court.

¶46

Key takeaways

The Executing Court is directed to consider the contentions, objections and defences put forth by the petitioner and to dispose of the execution proceedings in accordance with law.ratio¶46

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No.39370 of 2025 (GM-CPC), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru (S.R. Krishna Kumar J.), decided 10 February 2026: The Commissioner, City Municipal Council, Nanjangud, moved the Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking (i) a writ of certiorari to set aside the entire proceedings of Execution No.449/2025 pending before the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru (Annexure-D1), qua the petitioner, and (ii) a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent (Assistant Commissioner/Special Land Acquisition Officer) to release compensation for land acquired for the benefit of Suttur Gram Panchayath. After hearing counsel, the petitioner sought leave to withdraw; the Court recorded the submission and disposed of the petition as withdrawn, reserving liberty to urge all contentions before the Executing Court, which was directed to consider the petitioner's contentions, objections and defences and dispose of the execution proceedings in accordance with law. No precedent was cited and no monetary amount was awarded.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:8161 WP No. 39370 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.39370 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

THE COMMISSIONER CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, NANJANGUD TOWN, NANJANGUD, MYSURU DISTRICT - 571301.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. P MAHESHA, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,

¶14

MYSURU SUB-DIVISION,

¶15

DISTRICT OFFICE BUILDING,

¶16

CHAMARAJAPURAM, MYSURU – 570 005.

¶17

Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶18

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, URBAN WATER SUPPLY SEWERAGE BOARD NO.P4, JALABHAVAN, 3^RD FLOOR,

¶19

10^TH MAIN, 3^RD CROSS,

¶20

SARASWATHIPURAM,

¶21

MYSORE – 570 009.

¶22

SMT. PUTTAMADAMMA, W/O. CHIKKAMADANAYAKA,

¶23

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, SUTTUR VILLAGE, BILIGERE HOBLI, NANJANGUD TALUK – 571 129.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI. NEELAKANTAPPA K. PUJAR, HCGP FOR R-1)

¶26

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ENTIRE PROCEEDING INITIATED

¶27

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:8161 WP No. 39370 of 2025

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

AGAINST THE PETITIONER HEREIN EXECUTION NO.449/2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU.

¶31

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

¶32

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶33

ORAL ORDER

¶34

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

¶35

“i. Issue writ of certiorari by setting aside the entire proceedings initiated against the petitioner herein Execution No.449/2025 pending on the file of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru vide Annexure - 'D1', only is so far as the petitioner is concerned.

¶36

ii. Issue writ of mandamus directing the first respondent authority to release the compensation for the land acquired by them for the benefit of the Suttur Gram Panchayath.

¶37

iii. Pleased to pass any other order or direction this Hon'ble Court feels deem fit under these circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶38

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned HCGP appearing for respondent No.1.

¶39

After arguing the matter for sometime, learned counsel

¶40

for the petitioner-City Municipal Council, Nanjangud seeks permission to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file

¶41

¶42

NC: 2026:KHC:8161 WP No. 39370 of 2025

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

objections before the Executing Court and contest the execution proceedings on merits and in accordance with law.

¶45

The submission is placed on record.

¶46

Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of as withdrawn reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to urge all contentions including the contentions urged in the present petition before the Executing Court, which is hereby directed to consider the contentions, objections, defences, etc., put-forth by the petitioner and proceed further and dispose of the execution proceedings, in accordance with law.

¶47

Subject to the aforesaid directions and liberty reserved in favour of the petitioner, petition stands disposed of.

¶48

Sd/(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶49

¶50

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 18

The Commissioner v. the Assistant Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Commissioner v. the Assistant 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

Smt M v Shamala Vs Sri Mahesh R C

Sri Harish S H Vs Sri R Ashok Kumar

S M Naveen Kumar Vs S P Vinayakumar

Smt. Arunakumar Vs G Shivakumar

Sri. Chikka Arasaiah Vs Sri. Devaraju

Sri. Harinath Kumar Vs Sri. M. P. Gundappa