- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:11605 WP No. 5926 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 5926 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. M.R. PADMA KOM LATE A MALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 2. M NARAYAN BIN LATE A MALAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS 3. SHOBHA BIN LATE A MALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS 4. M BALACHANDRA BIN LATE A MALAIAH AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT NO. 392, 1ST CROSS ROAD, VIDYANAGAR, OPP. TERISHIAN COLLEGE, NAZARABAD, MYSORE - 560 010. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. N S BHAT., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MYSURU DISTRICT AT MYSURU - 580 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MYSURU SUB DIVISION, MYSURU - 580 001. Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:11605 WP No. 5926 of 2025 3. THE TAHSILDAR MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU - 580001. 4. BYABILO POOVAPPA BIN LATE POOVAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT NO. 541/B, KANTOOR ROAD, GOKULAM 3RD STAGE, MYSURU - 580 002. 5. K C NAVEEN BIN LATE CHENNAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O NO. 905, H.R.B.R. LAYOUT, 3RD B CROSS, 1ST STAGE, BANASWADI, BENGALURU. 6. P S MANAPPA BIN LATE P K SUBBAYYA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT NO. 541/B KANTOOR ROAD, GOKULAM 3RD STAGE, MYSURU - 580 002. 7. N U APPAIAH BIN LATE N G UTTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT NO.12, SANNIDHI, KANTOOR ROAD, GOKULAM, 3RD STAGE, MYSURU - 580 002. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.MANJUNATH, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 05-12-2023 PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER-RESPONDENT NO. 1 NO. IN CASE NO.RP-07/2021 (RD.005-0000304233) AS PER ANNEXURE-M AND ALSO TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 09-12-2020 PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER-RESPONDENT NO.2 IN CASE NO.RA.507/2017, AND 541, 542 AND 543/2018 AS PER ANNEXURE-N - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:11605 WP No. 5926 of 2025 CONSEQUENTLY TO DIRECT THE TAHSILDAR-RESPONDENT NO.3 TO DELETE THE SALE OF REVENUE SITE FORMED IN REVENUE LAYOUT FROM COLUMN NO.11 IN THE RECORD OF RIGHTS, 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 made in favour of the petitioners' father was challenged before the Assistant Commissioner. 2. The order of mutation was based on the basis of an order of the Land Tribunal and the issuance of a Form No.10. 3. It was the case of the appellants before the Assistant Commissioner that the petitioners' father, through his GPA holder, had formed sites and, had conveyed the same to the appellants therein under the registered sale deeds. 4. The Assistant Commissioner, taking note of the fact that there were 14 sale deeds executed during the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:11605 WP No. 5926 of 2025 period 1996 to 1998, came to the conclusion that the continuance of the mutation entries in favor of the petitioners' father could not be sustained and set aside the same and also directed the entry in column No.11 of the RTC as revenue sites. 5. This order of the Assistant Commissioner has been confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner. 6. The Deputy Commissioner has also taken note of the fact that, revenue sites have been formed and the revenue sites were purchased under the registered sale deeds and, therefore, the order of the Assistant Commissioner would not be found fault with. 7. It is however the case of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the sale deeds would be non-est, since the sale deeds were purported to have been executed within a period of 15 years i.e., the prohibited period of non-alienation and, even if there were such sale deeds, the same would be of no consequence. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:11605 WP No. 5926 of 2025 8. In my view, this argument cannot be considered or determined by the Revenue Authorities and the question as to whether the sale deeds in favor of the purchaser of sites were valid or not can only be determined by the Civil Court. 9. Since the Authorities have also reserved liberty to the petitioners to approach the Civil Court, there is no infirmity in the orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner. 10. Consequently, this writ petition is dismissed. 11. 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