- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2168 WP No. 784 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.784 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SUJATHA W/O JAYARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT KUPPE VILLAGE, HALAGERE POST, AMRUTHUR HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572111. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHARATH S GOWDA.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TUMKUR DISTRICT, TUMKUR-572101. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TUMKUR DISTRICT, TUMKUR-572101. Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2168 WP No. 784 of 2025 4. THE TAHASILDAR TUMKUR DISTRICT, TUMKUR-572101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH K., HCGP ) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 01.06.2023 BEARING NO. LND. CR.05/2023-24 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 VIDE ANNEXURE -A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER Learned HCGP is directed to take notice to respondents. 2. The captioned petition is filed assailing the endorsement dated 01.06.2023 as per Annexure-A issued by respondent No.4. Petitioner based on a grant order and consequent saguvali chit dated 7.11.2018 made a request to mutate her name in terms of the grant and saguvali chit. Since there was inaction, petitioner - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2168 WP No. 784 of 2025 knocked the doors of this Court and a mandamus was issued. Since direction issued by this Court was not complied, petitioner was compelled to initiate contempt proceedings. After initiation of contempt proceedings, now respondent No.4/Tahsildar has issued an endorsement indicating that petitioner is not in possession. 3. The learned counsel on record, on instructions, fairly concedes that pursuant this impugned endorsement, respondent No.3/Assistant Commissioner acting under Section 108-ZE of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act has virtually cancelled the grant, which is now seized before the Deputy Commissioner in an appeal. In view of this subsequent developments, this Court is of the view that the impugned endorsement issued by respondent No.4 is rendered infructuous. Therefore, the captioned petition may not survive for consideration. 4. It is clarified that if the petitioner succeeds in reviving the grant through a properly adjudicated quasi- judicial process, she retains the liberty to approach the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2168 WP No. 784 of 2025 competent authority with a fresh request to have her name recorded in the revenue records. 5. Furthermore, it is expressly stated that the impugned endorsement, which is the subject matter of challenge before this Court, shall not be taken into account by the Deputy Commissioner when re-examining the validity of the original grant obtained by the petitioner. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31