Disposed¶41

Byagadadenahalli Grama Panchayath v. Sri. R. Manjunath

Karnataka HC8 Jun 2026WP/39804/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WP No. 39804 of 2025 (LB-RES), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, oral order dated 08.06.2026 by B M Shyam Prasad J — Grama Panchayath writ petition under Articles 226/227 seeking directions against private respondents to act on notices dated 07/09/2023, 10/10/2023, 15/11/2023 (No. BYA/GRA/PAM/CR/15/2023-24) over residential construction used for commercial purposes; resolution dated 02.09.2025; possible pending Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 enquiry; no cause to approach writ Court absent final order and failure to comply; petition disposed, no orders on merits; advocate Prakash M S. for petitioner.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; petition disposed of with observations that the disposal shall not foreclose or impede other proceedings in terms of the notices. ¶41

Byagadadenahalli Grama Panchayath Vs Sri. R… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief granted; petition disposed of with observations that the disposal shall not foreclose or impede other proceedings in terms of the notices.

¶41

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner Grama Panchayath is entitled to a writ/direction against private respondents 2 and 3 to act in terms of the multiple notices issued by it regarding a residential construction allegedly used for commercial purposes.

¶35

Court's answer

If authorities have issued notices invoking statutory provisions, they must act in terms of those notices, pass final orders as would be permissible, and communicate the orders to the authorities for needful action.

¶40

Ratio / Principle

There cannot be a cause to approach this Court unless there is an order and a failure to comply; hence the petition seeking directions against private respondents to act on the petitioner's own notices could not be entertained.

¶40

Key takeaways

Even if the petition was filed because of a pending investigation/enquiry under the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984, there would be no cause for any action before this Court.obiter¶41
The Court has not examined any aspect of the matter on merits, and the disposal shall not, in any manner, foreclose or impede other proceedings that must be in terms of the notices.ratio¶46

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Constitution of India, Articles 226 and 227 — Writ petition by a Grama Panchayath seeking mandamus/directions against private respondents to dispose of and act in terms of multiple notices (dated 07/09/2023, 10/10/2023 and 15/11/2023, No. BYA/GRA/PAM/CR/15/2023-24) issued by the petitioner itself regarding a residential construction allegedly used for commercial purposes — Held: where authorities issue notices invoking statutory provisions, they must act in terms of those notices, pass final orders as permissible and communicate them to the authorities for needful action; there cannot be a cause to approach the writ Court unless there is an order and a failure to comply — Pendency of investigation/enquiry under the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 would equally afford no cause for action before the writ Court — Petition disposed of; the Court has not examined any aspect of the matter and the disposal shall not foreclose or impede other proceedings in terms of the notices.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:27211 WP No. 39804 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 39804 OF 2025 (LB-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

BYAGADADENAHALLI GRAMA PANCHAYATH KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT- 562106 REPT. BY PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER SRI. NAGARAJU B. L.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. PRAKASH M S., ADVOCATE)

¶12

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

AND:

¶14

SRI. R. MANJUNATH S/O RAMAPPA MAJOR NO. E-60, BEHIND ACC FACTORY BOMMASANDRA VILLAGE AND POST MUNICIPAL WARD NO. 7 ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT- 560099

¶15

SRI. SRINIVASALU N S/O VENKATARAIDU N

¶16

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:27211 WP No. 39804 of 2025

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

MAJOR

¶20

SRI. VADLAMUDI SRIHARI S/O V. SRINIVASALU MAJOR

¶21

R2 & 3 ARE R/AT NO. 404, SRINIVAS EMARALD APARTMENT KISHNAREDDY LAYOUT AECS LAYOUT, A BLOCK KUNDALAHALLI, MARATHAHALLI COLONY BANGALORE-560037

¶22

THE MEMBER SECRETARY AND JOINT DIRECTOR OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ANEKAL PLANNING AUTHORITY 'ANNA' NO. 430, HENNAGARA GATE, HOSURU MAIN ROAD BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT- 560099

¶23

ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BESCOM SUB-DIVISION ANEKAL TALUK

¶24

BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT- 562106

¶25

…RESPONDENTS

¶26

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TOTO ISSUE WRIT/ORDERS IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS/ DIRECTION/ORDERS AGAINST THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 AND 3 TO DISPOSE OF THE NOTICE MADE BY THE PETITIONER DATED 07/09/2023 VIDE ANNX-F BEARING NO. BYA/GRA/PAM/CR/15/2023-24 NOTICE DATED

¶27

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:27211 WP No. 39804 of 2025

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

10/10/2023 VIDE ANNX-G BEARING NO. BYA/GRA/PAM/CR/15/2023-24 AND NOTICE DATED 15/11/2023 VIDE ANNX-H BEARING NO. BYA/GRA/PAM/CR/15/2023-24.

¶30

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

¶31

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

¶32

ORAL ORDER

¶33

The petitioner, a Grama Panchayath, has issued

¶34

notices to the second and third respondents to ensure that the construction must not be occupied as action is proposed because a residential construction

¶35

is used for commercial purposes, and the petitioner has not issued just one notice but multiple notices. The petitioner seeks directions to the private respondents to act in terms of the notices.

¶36

The present petition is filed pursuant to the resolution dated 02.09.2025. This resolution reads that the judicial proceedings must be initiated because none of the Authorities including the police

¶37

¶38

NC: 2026:KHC:27211 WP No. 39804 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

Authorities and the electricity Authorities have acted against the private respondents and the others who have put up illegal constructions. Mr. M. S. Prakash, the learned counsel for the petitioner, is heard. This Court must opine that if the Authorities have issued notices invoking certain statutory provisions, they must act in terms of those notices and pass final orders as would be permissible and then communicate the orders to the Authorities for needful action, and there cannot be a cause to approach this Court unless there is an order and a failure to comply.

¶41

This Court, on reading of the petition averments and annexures appended, must also observe that it is possible that this petition is filed because of pending investigation/enquiry under the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984, and even then, there would be no cause for any action before this Court. Therefore, the petition stands disposed of observing that this

¶42

¶43

NC: 2026:KHC:27211 WP No. 39804 of 2025

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

Court has not examined any aspect of the matter and

¶46

this disposal shall not, in any matter, foreclose or impede other proceedings that must be in terms of

¶47

the notices.

¶48