- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10879 WP No. 2193 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 2193 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT RUKMANIYAMMA W/O LATE SRI RAJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/AT BALIGANAHALLI VILLAGE, LAKKUR HOBLI, MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-563160 (SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. C SHANKAR REDDY., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR-563101 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER KOLAR SUB DIVISION, KOLAR-563101 3. SMT. SHANTHAMMA W/O C R RAJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT CHALAGANAHALLI VILLAGE, LAKKUR HOBLI, MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-563160 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V.SHIVA REDDY, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 26/09/2024 MADE IN NO. R.A.P/232/2024 PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10879 WP No. 2193 of 2025 KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR -563101, THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE WP, PRODUCED AND MARKED AS ANNX-E TO THIS WP AND ALLOW THE SAME, 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. An order of mutation was made in M.R.No.6/2006- 07, by which, the name of Rajappa, the khatedar was deleted and his legal heirs names were entered. 2. An appeal was preferred by the petitioner in year 2019 and, this appeal was dismissed. 3. It may be pertinent to state here that, in this order of the Assistant Commissioner, though the claim was in respect of Sy.No.41 and M.R.No.6/2006-07 references have been made to Sy.No.113, which was unrelated to the dispute, and this was an obvious error. 4. Be that as it may, a revision was preferred before the Deputy Commissioner as against the said order and - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10879 WP No. 2193 of 2025 the Deputy Commissioner has taken the view that there was a dispute as to who was the legal heir of Rajappa and this question could not be adjudicated by the revenue authorities and he has directed the parties to approach the Civil Court. 5. In my view, even though, there is an error in the order of the Assistant Commissioner, the ultimate order of the Deputy Commissioner is just and proper since, the claim of the petitioner that she is the legal heir of the khatedar and not Shantamma, in whose name the revenue entries were reflected, cannot be adjudicated by the revenue authorities and, the only remedy available to the petitioner is to approach the Civil Court and secure an appropriate decree that she has succeeded to the property of Rajappa. 6. Reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court to establish her assertion that she is the legal heir entitled to succeed to the property of - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10879 WP No. 2193 of 2025 Rajappa, this writ petition is accordingly disposed of. 7. It is needless to state that, in the event, the decree is obtained by the petitioner, revenue entries will abide by the result of the said decree. 8. 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.: 12