- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22320 WP No. 7063 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 7063 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. M M CHOWDESHWARI, W/O.T. SONNAPPA, AGED MAJOR, R/O. NO.145, 3RD CROSS, AMBEDKAR NAGARA, WHITEFIELD, BANGALORE-560 066. 2. T . SONNAPPA, S/O THIMMARAYAPPA, AGED MAJOR, R/O. NO.145, 3RD CROSS, AMBEDKAR NAGARA, WHITEFIELD, BANGALORE-560 066. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHIVARUDRAPPA SHETKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, HUDSON CIRCLE, BANGALORE-560 002. 2. THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER, WHITEFIELD SUB-DIVISION, WHITEFIELD, BBMP MAHADEVAPURA, BANGALORE-560 048. …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22320 WP No. 7063 of 2025 (BY SRI. SINCHANA M R, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2, SRI. PAWAN KUMAR FOR R1 & R2(VK NOT FILED)) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSITUTUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO ISSUE KATHA IN THE NAME OF PETITIONERS AND TO PERMIT THEM TO PAY PROPERTY TAX IN RESPECT OF SITES NO. 145 AND 154 PROPERTY NO.42 SITUATED AT PATTANDURU AGRAHARA KRISHNARAJAPUR HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK, NOW COMES UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF MAHADEVAPUR BBMP, BAGNALORE TOTALLY MEASURING EAST TO WEST. 30 (THIRTY) FEET AND NORTH TO SOUTH. 100 (HUNDRED) FEET IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. 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 The petitioner is before this Court being aggrieved by the inaction on the part of respondent No.2 in not considering the representation submitted by the petitioner seeking issuance of khatha in his name. The petitioner's request is based on a Hakkupatra (grant certificate) issued in his favour by the competent - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22320 WP No. 7063 of 2025 authority. Despite furnishing the relevant grant order, respondent No.2 has not taken any conclusive action on the petitioner's request. 2. Learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 submits that upon receipt of the petitioner’s representation along with the copy of the Hakkupatra, respondent No.2 has forwarded the same to the jurisdictional Tahsildar, requesting verification of the genuineness of the said grant. 3. This Court is of the considered view that such a course of action adopted by respondent No.2 namely, seeking verification of the Hakkupatra through the jurisdictional Tahsildar is not legally sustainable. Once a grant or Hakkupatra is issued by the competent authority and furnished by the applicant, the revenue authority is not vested with any discretion to doubt or verify its authenticity unless there is a specific challenge or legal proceeding questioning the validity of the grant. The authority is required to act upon such a grant in - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22320 WP No. 7063 of 2025 accordance with law and proceed to consider the request of the applicant. 4. Be that as it may, even assuming respondent No.2 intended to seek clarification from the jurisdictional Tahsildar, it was incumbent upon him to diligently pursue such clarification by issuing reminders and securing a timely response. Under the pretext of awaiting such verification, respondent No.2 cannot indefinitely defer or withhold consideration of the petitioner's representation. 5. In the considered opinion of this Court, the inaction on the part of respondent No.2 in processing the petitioner's representation on the basis of the valid grant document amounts to dereliction of duty and is unsustainable in law. ORDER a. The writ petition is allowed. b. Respondent No.2 is hereby directed to consider the petitioner’s representation afresh, by taking cognizance of the Hakkupatra and other relevant - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22320 WP No. 7063 of 2025 documents furnished by the petitioner, without insisting on further verification from the jurisdictional Tahsildar, unless legally warranted. c. The said authority shall pass a reasoned and appropriate order on the representation, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. d. It is made clear that respondent No.2 shall not keep the representation pending merely on the ground of awaiting clarification from the jurisdictional Tahsildar, and shall act upon the material placed before him unless there exists any formal proceeding disputing the validity of the grant. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE AKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5