- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20410 WP No. 6440 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.6440 OF 2021 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. PURUSHOTHAM P. S/O PUTTASWAMAAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT RANGANATHA LAYOUT HAROHALLI VILLAGE, KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRAKASH M.H., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M S BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE THASHILDAR KANAKAPURA RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117. 3. SRI. BALEGOWDA S/O VEERABHADREGOWDA AGE : MAJOR R/AT DYAVASANDRA HAROHALLI HOBLI KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117. Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20410 WP No. 6440 of 2021 5. SRI. SOMASHEKAR K. S/O KEMPASARAIAH AGED: MAJOR R/AT KOTE HAROHALLI VILLAGE HAROHALLI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117. 6. SMT. BHAGYAMMA W/O KALEGOWDA AGED: MAJOR, R/AT MUDENAHALLI VILLAGE HAROHALLI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117. 7. SRI. NANDISH S/O KALLEGOWDA AGE : MAJOR, R/AT MUDENAHALLI VILLAGE HAROHALLI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117. 8. SRI. BALEGOWDA S/O CHOODEGOWDA AGE : MAJOR R/AT DYAVASANDRA VILLAGE, HAROHALLI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117. 4. SRI. ANIL KUMAR H C S/O CHOODAIAH AGED : MAJOR R/AT CHAMUNDESHWARI LAYOUT HAROHALLI VILLAGE, HAROHALLI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20410 WP No. 6440 of 2021 9. SMT. VARALAKSHMI W/O BALEGOWDA, AGE : MAJOR, R/AT DYAVASANDRA VILLAGE, HAROHALLI HOBLI KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH K., HCGP FOR R1 &R2; SRI. A. GOVINDARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI. M. VEERABHADRAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R6 & R7 R4, R5, R8 & R9 ARE SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 06.01.2021 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-P AS ILLEGAL; DIRECT TO THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 TO TAKE SUITABLE ACTION AGAINST THE RESPONDENT NO.2 FOR GROSS VIOLATION OF THE LAW AND MISUSE OF AUTHORITY WHILE PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 06.01.2021 VIDE ANNEXURE-P. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20410 WP No. 6440 of 2021 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER 1. In this writ petition, petitioner is assailing the order dated 06.01.2021 in RRT/DIS/1/2020(Annexure-P) passed by respondent No.2 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order at Annexure-P is without jurisdiction and not considering the factual aspects on record, the respondent No.2 has passed the impugned order. He also invited attention of the Court to the order dated 31.03.2021 passed by this Court and contended that, even though the petitioner herein is permitted to file appeal against the impugned order at Annexure-P before the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, same would not resolve the dispute in respect of the schedule land and accordingly, sought for interference of this Court. He further contended that, the respondent No.2 has modified the mutation in terms of the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20410 WP No. 6440 of 2021 unregistered deed i.e., deed of exchange produced at Annexure-L dated 23.04.1990 and accordingly, sought to allow the petition. 4. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that the petitioner herein is having efficacious remedy before the Land Tribunal under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 and therefore, sought for dismissal of the petition. 5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, I have carefully examined the impugned order at Annexure-P as well as the observation made by this Court on 31.03.2021. This Court has specifically observed that the impugned order at Annexure-P is contrary to the Judgment of Full Bench of this Court in the case of JAYAMMA AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, BANGALORE AND OTHERS, reported in ILR 2020 KAR 1449, wherein the Full Bench has expressed its anguish and suggested that the order of the Tahsildar has to be challenged in a properly instituted suit. On careful examination of the impugned order, it would - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20410 WP No. 6440 of 2021 indicate that respondent No.2 has passed endorsement on the basis of unregistered documents. 6. In the light of the observations made above, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order at Annexure-P is hereby quashed. The matter is remitted to respondent No.2 to pass order in accordance with law, after affording opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned, at the earliest. Further the respondent No.2 shall conclude the entire proceedings within six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE sac List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40