Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

K Murali Mohan vs the State of Karnataka

K Murali Mohan vs The State of Karnataka

Type Court Judgment Court Karnataka Orders Decided May 05, 2026
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1540679

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Karnataka Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP/11528/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

K Murali Mohan

Respondent

The State of Karnataka

Excerpt

.....aga) this writ petition is filed under articles 226and 227 of the constitution of india praying to (a) issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to demolish the petitioners properties without due process of law (b)pass such other order or orders as this honble court deems fit. this petition, coming on for preliminary hearing in ‘b’ group, this day, order was made therein as under: -3- coram: hon'ble mr. justice s vishwajith shettyoral orderheard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned additional government advocate on behalf of the respondents.2. the petitioners are before this court under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of india seeking for the following reliefs: a) issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to demolish the petitioners’ properties without due process of law; b) pass such other order or orders as this hon’ble court deems fit.3. it is the case of she petitioners that their propertyhas been acquired for the purpose of formation of national highway from devanahalli to hoskote. according to the petitioners, there are certain existing structures in the property in question and without taking note of the same and even before an award is passed, the respondent authorities are taking steps to demolish the said structures. -4-4. learned counsel for the petitioners referring tocertain photographs produced along with the petition submits that the property of the petitioners is already marked and therefore, they apprehend that the respondents are likely to take coercive steps to demolish the existing structure found in the property in question.5. learned additional government advocate oninstruction submits that the acquisition proceedings is still under progress and at this stage, the respondent authorities are not intending to demolish the existing structure found in the petitioners’ property. she submits that if an appropriate representation is given to the competent authority by the.....

Full Judgment

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MAY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 11528 OF 2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:

1. K MURALI MOHAN S/O LATE A.L. KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS RESIDING AT ADARSH NAGAR, MALUR TOWN, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563130

2. G.P. ANJANAPPA, S/O PUTTANNA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, RESIDING AT GUDDANAHALLY VILLAGE, MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563130

Digitally signed by 3. RAJESH S, NANDINI M S S/O SRINIVAS, Location: AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, HIGH COURT OF RESIDING AT SRI LAKSHMI NILAYA, KARNATAKA BACKSIDE OF JUNIOR COLLEGE, ADARSH NAGAR, MALUR TOWN - 563130

4. SMT. VEENA SRI M,

D/O MOHAN, W/O M. ARUN KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT MALUR TOWN, -2- KOLAR DISTRICT - 563130 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI SHRIRAM ADIGA, ADV. FOR SRI. SRINIVAS G., ADVOCATE) AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU -560001 BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KARNATAKA STATE HIGHWAYS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT K.R. CIRCLE BENGALURU - 560001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SARITHA KULKARNI, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226

AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (A) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS NOT TO DEMOLISH THE PETITIONERS PROPERTIES WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW (B)PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER OR ORDERS AS THIS HONBLE COURT DEEMS FIT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: -3- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

ORAL ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Government Advocate on behalf of the respondents.

2. The petitioners are before this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking for the following reliefs: a) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to demolish the petitioners’ properties without due process of law; b) Pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit.

3. It is the case of she petitioners that their property

has been acquired for the purpose of formation of National Highway from Devanahalli to Hoskote. According to the petitioners, there are certain existing structures in the property in question and without taking note of the same and even before an award is passed, the respondent authorities are taking steps to demolish the said structures. -4-

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners referring to

certain photographs produced along with the petition submits that the property of the petitioners is already marked and therefore, they apprehend that the respondents are likely to take coercive steps to demolish the existing structure found in the property in question.

5. Learned Additional Government Advocate on

instruction submits that the acquisition proceedings is still under progress and at this stage, the respondent authorities are not intending to demolish the existing structure found in the petitioners’ property. She submits that if an appropriate representation is given to the competent authority by the petitioners, the same shall be considered and appropriate orders in accordance with law shall be passed within a reasonable period.

6. The said submission is placed on record.

7. The writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioners to submit an appropriate representation within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this -5-

order before the competent authority putting forward their

grievance and the if the competent authority receives such a representation, the same shall be considered and appropriate orders in accordance with law shall be passed on the same as expeditiously as possible but not later than period of four months from the date of receipt of such an application.

8. In the meanwhile the respondent authorities are

directed not to take any coercive action as against the petitioners property more so as against the existing structures found in the petition schedule properties. SD/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE SSB

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial