Smt. Gowramma Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Smt. Gowramma Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of (not quashed); respondent No.3 directed to form the road only after a survey determining whether the property is public or private - road only on government/panchayat land, and only after acquisition in accordance with law if the land is private; ADLR's assistance may be sought for the survey; petitioner retains liberty to challenge any future decision; notice to respondent No.4 dispensed with.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition seeking to quash the work order dated 25.08.2025 (Annexure-F) insofar as it relates to the petitioner's schedule property should be allowed, i.e., whether respondent Nos.3 and 4 can form the road over the petitioner's property without acquisition

Court's answer

Respondent No.3 may form the road only on government / panchayat property.

Ratio / Principle

If the property over which the road is to be formed belongs to a private individual, the necessary acquisition will have to be done in accordance with law before the road is formed.

Key takeaways

Respondent No.3 is at liberty to request the jurisdictional Assistant Director of Land Records ('the ADLR') to conduct the necessary survey in accordance with law to find out whether the road being formed is on a public property or a private property.ratio¶42
The writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3 to form the intended road only after conducting the necessary survey and determining whether the property is a public property or a private property; if aggrieved by any decision taken by the respondents, the petitioner has liberty to challenge the same in the manner known to law.ratio¶47

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (LB-RES) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by a 90-year-old landowner challenging Work Order dated 25.08.2025 (No. DR.62/2024-25, Annexure-F) issued by respondent No.3-Executive Engineer, Panchayath Raj Engg Division, in favour of respondent No.4-contractor for forming a road in Kelagere Village, Maluru Hobli, Channapatna Taluk, Ramanagara District, insofar as it related to her schedule property. Based on respondent No.3's counsel submitting that a survey would determine ownership and that acquisition would precede road formation on private land, the High Court (M.I.Arun, J) disposed of the petition directing: (i) respondent No.3 may form the road only on government/panchayat property; (ii) if the property belongs to a private individual, necessary acquisition must first be done in accordance with law; (iii) respondent No.3 may seek the assistance of the jurisdictional ADLR to survey and determine whether the alignment is on public or private property; notice to respondent No.4 was dispensed with, and the petitioner remains free to challenge any subsequent decision in the manner known to law.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16580 WP No. 8427 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 8427 OF 2026 (LB-RES)

BETWEEN:

SMT. GOWRAMMA W/O LATE K.T. THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 90 YEARS, R/AT NO.29, 1^ST MAIN ROAD, KELAGERE NAGAVARA, MALURU HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA, RAMANAGARA -562 108.

…PETITIONER

(BY SMT. SHILPA RANI., ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA

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

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU- 560 001

TAHSILDAR, CHANNAPATNA, CHANNAPATNA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT- 562 160

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PANCHAYATH RAJ ENGG DIVISION, RAMANAGARA,

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK- 562 159

SRI. SRINIVASA K.T.,

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16580 WP No. 8427 of 2026

HC-KAR

CONTRACTOR REGN.NO.16625/2021-22, KODAMBALLI VILLAGE AND POST, VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK- 562 138, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. B.BOPANNA, AGA FOR R1 AND R2; M S DEVARAJU., ADVOCATE FOR R3;

NOTICE TO R4 D/W, V/C/O/DATED 24.03.2026)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE WORK ORDER DATED 25.08.2025 BEARING NO. DR.62/2024-25 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 AS PER ANNEXURE-F IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO SCHEDULE PROPERTY BELONGING TO THE PETITIONER., AND ETC.

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

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

ORAL ORDER

The grievance of the petitioner is respondent No.3Panchayath has issued a work order to respondent No.4Contractor authorizing him to form a road in Kelagere Village, Maluru Hobli, Channapatna Taluk, Ramanagara

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:16580 WP No. 8427 of 2026

HC-KAR

District. In the process of making the said road, respondent No.4, acting under the directions of respondent No.3, has sought to encroach upon the petitioner's property for the purpose of forming the road. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.

The learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3, upon instructions, submits that a survey will be conducted to determine whether the place where the road is being formed is a panchayat property or a government property or the property of the petitioner and only if it is found to be a government property or a panchayat property, the road will be formed, otherwise the alignment of the road will be changed to exclude the property of the petitioner.

He further submits that if it becomes inevitable to form a road on the property of the petitioner, then in that event, the necessary acquisition will be done in accordance with law and only thereafter a road will be formed. He further submits that, presently, respondent

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16580 WP No. 8427 of 2026

HC-KAR

No.4 is forming a road only as per the directions issued by respondent No.3 and suitable directions will be issued to respondent No.4 in this regard.

In the light of the aforementioned submission

of the learned counsel for respondent No.3, notice to respondent No.4 is dispensed with.

Respondent No.3 may form the road only on government / panchayat property. If the property belongs to a private individual, then in that event, the necessary acquisition will have to be done in accordance with law. If respondent No.3 wants to conduct the necessary survey with the assistance of the jurisdictional Assistant Director of Land Records (for short, 'the ADLR'), it is always at liberty to request the ADLR to do the same in accordance with law to find out whether the road which is being formed is on a public property or a private property.

For the aforementioned reasons, the Writ Petition stands disposed of with a direction to respondent

5 -

NC: 2026:KHC:16580 WP No. 8427 of 2026

HC-KAR

No.3 to form the intended road only after conducting the necessary survey and determining whether the property is a public property or a private property. If the petitioner is aggrieved by any decision that may be taken by the respondent, it is needless to state that she is having all the liberty to challenge the same in the manner known to law.

Sd/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

CH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 52