Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 12570 (KAR)

SRI K VENKATESHWARA RAO v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/223/2025 · 2025-04-03

N S Sanjay Gowda

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14309 WP No. 223 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 223 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. K. VENKATESHWARA RAO AGED ABOUT 59 YAERS S/O K. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO, RESIDING AT NO.30, 2ND CROSS , SWATHI ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR BENGALURU-560 027. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANJAY G., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. DARSHAN R.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF LAND REVENUE, REPRESENTED BY IT SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGLAURU- 560 001. 2. THE DPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN K.G ROAD, SAMPANGI RAMANAGARA, BENGALURU-560 009. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE SOUTH DIVISION, K.G ROAD, BENGALURU- 560 009. 4. THE TAHSILDAR ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL-562 106. Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14309 WP No. 223 of 2025 5. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, VILLAGE PANCHAYATH OFFICE, SARJAPURA, ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL-562 106. 6. SRI. MANJUNATH D.N., S/O. LATE NANJUNDAPPA, RESIDING AT DOMMASANDRA VILLAGE, SARJAPUR HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT- 562 125. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. SHIVA REDDY, AGA FOR R1 TO R5, VIDE ORDER DATED 03.04.2025, NOTICE TO R6 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH OR SET ASIDE THE MR NO. T26 OF 2024-2025 DTD. 05.11.2024 ENTERED BY R-4 PRODUCED AT ANNX-A AND DIRECTION TO RESPONDENTS TO RESTORE AND ENTER THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER IN THE RTC IN RESPECT OF SCHEDULE PROPERTY PRODUCED AT ANNX-K AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the removal of his name from the revenue records, as reflected in the extract of the mutation register, which is produced at Annexure - A. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the Deputy Commissioner in a revision under Section 136(3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act filed by one - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14309 WP No. 223 of 2025 Manjunatha D.N. against the petitioner herein, proceeded to pass an order in the following terms: " DzÉñÀ D£ÉÃPÀ¯ï vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ, ¸ÀeÁð¥ÀÅgÀ ºÉÆÃ§½, AiÀĪÀÄgÉ UÁæªÀÄzÀ ¸À.£ÀA.110 gÀ 2-19 UÀÄAmÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 2-00 JPÀgÉ §UÉÎ, G¥À«¨sÁUÁ¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÀÄ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ zÀQët G¥À«¨sÁUÀ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ gÀªÀgÀÄ ªÀiÁrzÀ DzÉñÀ RA(A) 2/2022 ¢:18-3-2023 gÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ ¸À°è¹zÀ ¥ÀÅ£Àgï ¥Àj²Ã®£Á CfðAiÀİè CºÀðvÉ EgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ ¥Àæ²vÀ DzÉñÀªÀ£ÀÄß ¤AiÀĪÀÄPÉÌ «gÀÄzÀÞªÁV ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ PÀAqÀħAzÀ PÁgÀt ¥Àæ²ßvÀ DzÉñÀ gÀzÀÄÝ¥Àr¹zÉ. ºÁUÀÆ PÀAzÁAiÀÄ zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß G¥À«¨sÁUÁ¢üPÁjUÀ¼À DzÉñÀPÉÌ ªÀÄÄAZÉ EzÀÝAvÉ PÁ¯ÉÆÃavÀUÉÆ½¸À®Ä DzÉò¹zÉ. ºÁUÀÆ GZÀÑ£ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ WP 19425/2019 gÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀt ºÁUÀÆ 3£ÀÄß Cr¶£À¯ï r¹ÖæPïì & ¸ÉµÀ£ïì dqïÓ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄ D£ÉÃPÀ¯ï£À ¥ÀæPÀgÀt R5089/2020 gÀ «ZÁgÀuÉ §UÉÎ ¥ÀºÀt PÁ®A 11 gÀ°è zÁR°¸À®Ä DzÉò¹zÉ." 3. The petitioner therefore contends that the Tahsildar could at best have made an entry regarding the pending litigation and by no stretch of the imagination could he have deleted the name of the petitioner from the Revenue Records. The Tahsildar has however proceeded to remove the name of the petitioner in the revenue records without there being any justification and, this was wholly illegal. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14309 WP No. 223 of 2025 4. As could be seen from the extracted portion above, the Deputy Commissioner basically directed the entry to be made in the revenue records regarding the pendency of the litigation and, nowhere in the order as he either indirectly or directly implied that the name of the petitioner should be removed. 5. Consequently, the order of the Tahsildar in removing the name of the petitioner vide Annexure - A cannot be sustained. Consequently, the M.R.No.T26/2024-25 is quashed insofar as it relates to removal of the name of the petitioner from the revenue records. 6. This writ petition is accordingly allowed. 7. In view of the disposal of the petition, all pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE GSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8