Karnataka High Court
Mr. Kodandapani S/O Muthyalappa ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 12 March, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:3946
WP No. 108013 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
WRIT PETITION NO.108013 OF 2025 (GM-TEN)
BETWEEN:
MR. KODANDAPANI S/O. MUTHYALAPPA GUNTAPALLI,
AGE. 58 YEARS, OCC. CONTRACTORS,
R/O. BANKAPUR CHOWK, INDIRA NAGAR,
PB ROAD, TQ. HUBLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580024.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAHUL S.KUNTOJI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REP. BY THE HON'BLE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT,
VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU-580001.
2. THE HUBLI-DHARWAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
MOHANKUMAR REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER,
B SHELAR SIR SIDDAPPA KAMBLI ROAD,
TQ. HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580020.
Digitally signed by
MOHANKUMAR B
SHELAR 3. THE REGIONAL COMMISSIONER,
Date: 2026.03.17 HUBLI-DHARWAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
14:14:08 +0530 ZONE-10 OFFICE, NEAR OLD MARKET,
OLD HUBLI, TQ. HUBBALLI,
DIST. DHARWAD-580024.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. G.K. HIREGOUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI. IRANAGOUDA K.KABBUR, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:3946
WP No. 108013 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A) ISSUE A WRIT IN
THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE OFFICE ORDER PASSED
BY RESPONDENT NO.2 BY HDMC/01/2025-26 DATED 22.09.2025 VIDE
ANNEXURE-F. B) ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI
QUASHING THE INTIMATION LETTER BY RESPONDENT NO.3 BY
HDMC/74/05/2025-26 DATED 26/09/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-G. C)
ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE
RESPONDENT NO.2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED
13/10/2025 AT ANNEXURE-H. D) ANY OTHER RELIEFS THIS HON'BLE
COURT DEEMS FIT MAY PLEASE BE GRANTED IN FAVOUR OF THE
PRESENT PETITIONER.
THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the office order dated 22.09.2025 passed by respondent No.2 vide Annexure-F, and also intimation letter issued by respondent No.3 dated 26.09.2025 vide Annexure-G, and sought for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated 13.10.2025 vide Annexure-H.
2. Brief facts leading rise to filing of this writ petition are as follows:
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:3946 WP No. 108013 of 2025 HC-KAR The petitioner is a contractor carrying out the work of Solid Waste Management on a contract basis. It was agreed between the petitioner and respondent No.2 that the petitioner shall carry out the work of cleaning streets and collecting waste from door to door in old Ward No.61 and in Zone 10 with 30 workers. The work order was further extended by letter dated 30.12.2010 vide Annexure-D.
3. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 without following due process of law, without issuing a notice, and without following the principles of natural justice, terminated the work order unilaterally vide Annexure-F dated 22.09.2025 and Annexure-G dated 26.09.2025.
4. However, by intimation letter dated 22.09.2025 and 26.09.2025 vide Annexures-F and G, respondent Nos.2 and 3 have unilaterally terminated the work order, in doing so, respondent Nos.2 and 3 have not followed due process of law and the principles of natural justice by failing to issue any notice in prior to the petitioner. The impugned order -4- NC: 2026:KHC-D:3946 WP No. 108013 of 2025 HC-KAR passed by respondent Nos.2 and 3 is in violation of fundamental rights of the petitioner. Hence, this writ petition.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a contractor, and carrying out the work of Solid Waste Management on a contract basis and the contract was extended until further orders by letter dated 30.12.2010 vide Annexure-D. However, respondent Nos. 2 and 3 unilaterally terminated the contract. The cancellation of a contract unilaterally is arbitrary, erroneous and in violation of the principles of natural justice. Hence, on these grounds, prays to allow the writ petition.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits that similar contractors have filed similar writ petitions before this court in W.P.No.108378/2025 and connected matters. The Co-ordinate Bench of this court -5- NC: 2026:KHC-D:3946 WP No. 108013 of 2025 HC-KAR dismissed the writ petitions vide order dated 22.01.2026. He submits that this writ petition is also liable to be dismissed. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the writ petition.
8. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.
9. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner is a contractor and carrying out Solid Waste Management Project on a contract basis, and the contract was extended from time to time by respondent Nos.2 and 3. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 received several complaints against the petitioner, and also print media reports, which disclose that the contractor has failed to perform the terms and conditions of the contract. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 taking note of the complaints, representation submitted by the various authorities, and also workers who were working under the petitioner, have taken a decision to terminate the extension of work order issued to the petitioner. The Co- -6-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:3946 WP No. 108013 of 2025 HC-KAR ordinate Bench of this court in W.P.No.108378/2025 and connected matters dismissed the writ petitions. Considering the said order, this writ petition is also liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this court proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The writ petition is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE MBS CT: UMD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19