- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2636 WP No. 200792 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF MAY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO.200792 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. JAYASHREE W/O SANGRAM JULAI, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD AND AGRICULTURE, R/O VILLAGE AVRAD-S TQ. AND DIST. BIDAR 2. SMT. GEETA W/O MALLIKARJUN JULAI, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD AND AGRICULTURE, R/O VILLAGE AVRAD-S, TQ. AND DIST. BIDAR 3. ASHOK S/O GHALEPPA JULAI, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE AND PROFESSOR IN AYURVEDIC MEDICAL COLLEGE, BIDAR R/O VILLAGE AVRAD-S, TQ. AND DIST. BIDAR 4. SMT. NAGAMMA W/O GHALEPPA JULAI, AGE: 94 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE AND HOUSEHOLD, R/O VILLAGE AVRAD-S, TQ. AND DIST. BIDAR …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. K. M. GHATE, AND SRI. VIVEKANAND, ADVOCATES) Digitally signed by NIJAMUDDIN JAMKHANDI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2636 WP No. 200792 of 2025 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA R/BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA VEEDHI, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BIDAR, BIDAR DISTRICT-585401. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BIDAR, BIDAR DISTRICT-585401 4. THE TAHASILDAR BIDAR, DISTRICT BIDAR,585401 5. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, BIDAR, DISTRICT BIDAR-585401 6. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR, BAGDAL REVENUE CIRCLE, TQ. AND DIST. BIDAR-585226 7. THE VILLAGE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, BAGDAL VILLAGE, TQ. AND DIST. BIDAR-585226 8. SMT. SAVALIBEE W/O ABDUL AJEEZ, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD AND AGRICULTURE, R/O VILLAGE BAGADAL, TQ. AND DIST. BIDAR- 585226, 9. MASTANSAB S/O ISMAILSAB, AGE:55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O VILLAGE BAGADAL, TQ. AND DIST. BIDAR- 585226, 10. MOHAMMED ISMAIL S/O ABDUL HAMEED MACHKURI, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O VILLAGE BAGADAL, TQ. AND DIST. BIDAR-585226 - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2636 WP No. 200792 of 2025 11. FATIMABI W/O MOHAMMED ABDUL SAMDHANI, MASULDAR, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD AND AGRICULTURE, R/O VILLAGE BAGADAL, TQ. AND DIST. BIDAR-585226, 12. SURESH S/O PRABHU UPAR AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O VILLAGE BAGADAL, TQ. AND DIST. BIDAR- 585226, 13. PRABHURAO S/O VEERASANGAPPA RAJGIRI, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O VILLAGE BAGADAL, TQ. AND DIST. BIDAR-585226, 14. KHASHIMSAB S/O HUSSAINSAB LANGOTI, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O VILLAGE BAGADAL, TQ. AND DIST. BIDAR- 585226, 15. CHITRAMMA W/O VITAHL KURUBAR, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD AND AGRICULTURE R/O VILLAGE BAGADAL TQ. AND DIST.BIDAR-585226 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MAYA T. R., HCGP R1 TO R7; SRI. SACHIN M. MAHAJAN, ADVOCATE FOR R8, R10 TO R15;R9 SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI/ORDER/DIRECTION QUASHING THE MEMO/ORDER ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT TAHSILDAR IN FILE NO. REVENUE/LND/CR-144/2024-25 DATED 07.01.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-K TO THE WRIT PETITION B) ISSUE ANY ORDER/DIRECTION AS DEEMED FIT AND PROPER BY THIS HON’BLE COURT DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO PAY THE COST OF THE PRESENT WRIT PETITION TO THE PETITIONERS, TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2636 WP No. 200792 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) This writ petition is filed seeking following relief: a) Issue writ of certiorari/order/direction quashing the memo/order issued by 4th respondent- Tahsildar in File No.REVENUE/LND/CR-144/2024- 25 Dated 07.01.2025 vide Annexure-K to the writ petition. b) Issue any order/direction as deemed fit and proper by this Hon’ble Court directing the respondents to pay the cost of the present writ petition to the petitioners. 2. The brief facts leading rise to filing of this writ petition are as under: (a) The respondent Nos.8 and 10 to 15 submitted an application to the respondent No.4 with a request to form a pathway from the Eastern side boundary of the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2636 WP No. 200792 of 2025 petitioners land where nala flows from South-North direction and contended that the petitioner No.4 has closed the said pathway about six years ago. (b) The respondent No.4 issued a memo to the Taluka Surveyor, Revenue Inspector, Bagadal, directing them to conduct a joint survey and submit a report about existence of nala and its encroachment, in case encroachment is there. (c) The Taluka Surveyor submitted a report to the Tahsildar. The Tahsildar based on the report submitted by the Taluka Surveyor, passed the impugned order directing the Administrative Officer to remove the encroachment. The petitioners aggrieved by the impugned order dated 07.01.2025, vide Annexure-K, filed this writ petition. 3. The contesting respondents filed the statement of objections, contending that there is an encroachment on the nala and requested the respondent No.4 to remove the encroachment and the respondent No.4 has passed the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2636 WP No. 200792 of 2025 impugned order in accordance with law. Hence, prays to dismiss the writ petition. 4. The petitioners filed rejoinder denying the statement of objections. Hence, prays to allow the writ petition. 5. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.8 and 10 to 15 and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 7. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent No.4 before passing the impugned order, has not issued a notice to the petitioners. Thus, the impugned order passed by the respondent No.4 is in violation of principles of natural justice. He also submits that the respondent No.4 has no jurisdiction to entertain the grievance of the respondent Nos.8 and 10 to 15. He further submits that the Deputy Commissioner has jurisdiction to decide the disputes between the petitioners and the respondents as per Section 103 of the Karnataka - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2636 WP No. 200792 of 2025 Land Revenue Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short). Hence, on these grounds he prays to allow the writ petition. 7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.8 and 10 to 15 submits that if liberty is reserved to the respondent Nos.8 and 10 to 15 to make a representation to the Deputy Commissioner as per Section 103 of the Act, the petitioners will approach the Deputy Commissioner. Accordingly, prays to dispose of the writ petition. 8. Perused the records. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 9. It is not disputed that the respondent Nos.8 and 10 to 15 submitted a representation to the respondent No.4 to clear the alleged encroachment on nala. The respondent No.3 has sought for a report from the Taluka Surveyor. Accordingly, the Taluka Surveyor except issuing notice to the respondent Nos.8 and 10 to 15, has submitted a report stating that there is alleged - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2636 WP No. 200792 of 2025 encroachment in the nala. The respondent No.4 based on the report submitted by the Taluka Surveyor, has passed the impugned order. The respondent No.4 before passing an impugned order has not conducted any enquiry and no notice was issued to the petitioners. Further, the impugned order passed by the respondent No.4 is in violation of principles of natural justice. 10. Further, Section 103 of the Act, provides right of way to relinquished or forfeited land or to land used for purpose of agriculture, which reads as under:- (1) If any land is relinquished or forfeited under the provisions of this Act, and the way to such land lies through other land, the right of way through such other land shall continue to the future holder of the land relinquished or forfeited. (2) If any right of way to a land used for purposes of agriculture and duly entered in any map or land record maintained under this Act, is wrongfully obstructed or interfered with, any person aggrieved thereby may apply to the Deputy Commissioner for removal of such obstruction or interference. The Deputy Commissioner may, after a summary - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2636 WP No. 200792 of 2025 enquiry, order the obstruction to be removed, or the interference to be stopped and may for enforcing such order take such action as may be necessary. (3) The order of the Deputy Commissioner under sub-section (2) shall, subject to the decision in a civil suit, be final. 11. From bare reading of Section 103 of the Act, if any land relinquished or forfeited under the provisions of the Act, the way to such land lies through other land, the right of way through such other land shall continue to the future holder of the land relinquished or forfeited. 12. It is the Deputy Commissioner has jurisdiction to decide or to hold an enquiry and pass an order for removal of obstruction or interference after holding a summary enquiry. It is the Deputy Commissioner has jurisdiction to decide about the removal of such obstruction or interference. The respondent No.4 has no jurisdiction to pass an impugned order. The order passed by the respondent No.4 is without jurisdiction. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2636 WP No. 200792 of 2025 13. Hence, in view of the above discussion, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned memo/order passed by the respondent No.4 in File No.REVENUE/LND/CR-144/2024-25, Dated 07.01.2025, vide Annexure-K is set aside. (iii) Liberty is reserved to the respondent Nos.8 and 10 to 15 to make proper representation/application to the Deputy Commissioner within a period of two weeks from today. If, such application is made to the Deputy Commissioner i.e. respondent No.2, the respondent No.2 is directed to pass an order after holding due enquiry as per Section 103 of the Karnataka Land - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2636 WP No. 200792 of 2025 Revenue Act, 1964, as expeditiously as possible. It is made clear that this Court has not made any adjudication on merits in issue. All the contentions of the parties are kept open. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE SDU LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 9 CT:SI