Karnataka High Court
WA/564/2026 of SRI B M PRASANNAKUMAR Vs RANJITHA B.O., on 1 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010356492026 NC: 2026:KHC:47560-DB RP No. 279 of 2026 C/W WA No. 564 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF REVIEW PETITION NO. 279 OF 2026 C/W WRIT
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
REVIEW PETITION NO. 279 OF 2026
C/W
WRIT APPEAL NO. 564 OF 2026 (S-RES)
IN RP No. 279/2026
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI B M PRASANNA KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
S/O A K MANJAPPA,
BEERAGONDANAHALLI,
HONNALI TALUKU,
DAVANAGERE-577224
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. P.P.HEGDE, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. GANAPATHI BHAT., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
ZILLA PANCHAYAT,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577001
2.
THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
TALUK PANCHAYAT
HONNALLI TALUK - 577217
Digitally
signed by
VASANTHA
KUMARY B K
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
3.
THE BEERAGONDANAHALLI
GRAM PANCHAYATHI
HONNALLI TALUK
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577224
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
4.
SMT RANJITHA BO
W/O GANESH G N,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
R/O BEERAGONDANAHALLI,
HONNALI TALUK,
DAVANAGERE-577224
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. N.R.JAGADEESWARA., ADVOCATE FOR R3; R1, R2 AND R4 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 114
R/W ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC 1908, PRAYING TO REVIEW
THE ORDER DATED.16.03.2026 PASSED IN WRIT APPEAL
NO.690/2024 AND CONSEQUENTLY RESTORE THE WRIT
APPEAL NO.690/2024 FOR HEARING IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN WA NO. 564/2026
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI B M PRASANNAKUMAR
S/O A K MANJAPPA
BEERAGONDANAHALLI,
HONNALI TALUK,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT 577 224
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. P.P HEGDE, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. GANAPATHI BHAT., ADVOCATE)
HC-KAR
AND:
1.
RANJITHA B.O.,
W/O GANESH G N
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
WORKING AS BILL COLLECTOR
BEERAGONDANAHALLI
GRAMA PANCHAYATH
BEERAGONDANAHALLI HONNALI TALUK
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.
R/A BEERAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE
HONNALI TALUK
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577217
2.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND
PANCHAYAT RAJ
3RD GATE, 3RD FLOOR
M S BUILDING
BANGALORE-560001
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
3.
THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
OFFICE OF ZILLA PANCHAYATH
LOKIKKERE ROAD
OPPOSITE DOORADARSHAN KENDRA
DAVANAGER-577005
CHITRADURGA-577501
4.
THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
OFFICE OF TALUK PANCHAYATH
HONNALI TALUK
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577217
5.
THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
HC-KAR
HONNALI TALUK
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577224
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M.N. SUDEV HEGDE, AGA FOR R2)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 18/12/2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED
SINGLE
JUDGE
IN
WP
NO.26247/2023
AND
CONSEQUENTLY
DISMISS
THE
WRIT
PETITION
NO.26247/2023 FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.1, ETC.
THIS PETITION ALONG WITH WRIT APPEAL, COMING ON
FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF)
This Review Petition is filed seeking review of the judgment and order dated 16.03.2026 passed in Writ Appeal No.690/2024, whereby this Court dismissed the writ appeal finding no ground to interfere with the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
HC-KAR
3. The principal contention urged by the petitioner is that there is an error apparent on the face of the record warranting review of the order passed in the writ appeal.
4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the judgment and order sought to be reviewed.
5. We do not find any error apparent on the face of record to review the order dated 16.03.2026. Accordingly, the review petition is dismissed.
6. It is also noticed that Writ Appeal No.564/2026 is connected with the present proceedings which arises out of common order under challenge in W.A.No.690/2024. Since we have already dismissed the writ appeal (W.A.No.690/2024), the present appeal does not survive for independent consideration.
7. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed in terms of the judgment and order dated 16.03.2026 passed in W.A. No.690/2014.
HC-KAR
8. In view of dismissal of the appeal, pending IAs, if any, do not survive for consideration and accordingly, they stand disposed of.
Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE
Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE
RKA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1