- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4681 WP No. 5652 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 5652 OF 2022 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN: SMT. VANAJAKSHI, W/O LATE V.KRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/AT NO.17, ANJANEYA TEMPLE STREET, DODDABANASAWADI, BANGALORE-43. …PETITIONER (BY SRI MURALI BABU M, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY THE TAHASILDAR, BENGALURU NORTH ADDITIONAL TALUK, NOW YELAHANKA TALUK, BENGALURU-64. 2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER-I, BANGALORE NORTH SUB-DIVISION, BANGALORE-1. 3. SRI C.V.BALACHANDRA REDDY, S/O LATE CHIKKA VENKATAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/AT NO.17, ANJANEYA TEMPLE STREET, DODDA BANASAWADI, BANGALORE-43. 4. SMT. MUNITHAYAMMA, W/O MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, R/O YEDIYUR VILLAGE, MAHADEVAKODIGEHALLI, Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4681 WP No. 5652 of 2022 5. JALA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH ADDL. TALUK, BENGALURU-64. SRI K. GOPALA GOWDA, S/O LATE PATEL KRISHNE GOWDA DEAD BY LRS. 5(a) 5(b) SMT. G. PREM KUMARI, D/O LATE K.GOPAL GOWDA, W/O G.K.KENCHE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT NO.7, 2ND CROSS, MANJUNATHA RESIDENCY, KOTTIGENAHALLI, IAF POST, BENGALURU-63. SMT. RATHNAMMA, W/O LATE K. GOPALA GOWDA, AGED MAJOR, R/O MAHADEVAKODIGEHALLI, JALA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH ADDL. TALUK, BENGALURU-64. 6. 7. 8. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-II, KIADB, SCOUTS AND GUIDES BUILDING, PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE-1. THE TAHASILDAR, YALAHANKA TALUK, BANGALORE NORTH. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, YALAHANKA TALUK, YALAHANKA, BANGALORE NORTH. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE.N, HCGP FOR R-1, R-2, R-7 & R-8; - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4681 WP No. 5652 of 2022 SRI RAVICHANDRA, ADVOCATE FOR C/GPA OF R-5(b) IN [CP NO.2970/2022]; SRI C.R SUBRAMANYA, ADVOCATE FOR R-5(a); SRI R KRISHNA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R-3; SRI J.P SRINIVASA, ADVOCATE FOR R-4 SRI P.V CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-6) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTCILES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALLING FOR RECORDS AND PROCEEDS OF THE CASE THIS HON'BLE COURT BE PLEASED TO EXERCISE ITS JURISDICTION UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND ISSUE: A) TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 13.01.2022 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IN CASE NO. RRT(2) (NA) CR 157/2008-09 ANNEXURE-H IN SO FOR AS THE OBSERVATION MADE IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AT PAGE NO.7 IN PARA NO.2 THAT THE R-2 CONTENDING THAT, HE HAS PURCHASED THE SAID PROPERTY UNDER A REGISTERED SALE DEED DATED 05.04.1984. HOWEVER TO SUBSTANTIATE THE SAME, HE HAS NOT PRODUCED ANY MATERIAL DOCUMENTS.THEREFORE I AM OF THE OPINION THAT THERE IS NO FORCE IN CONTENTION OF LEGAL HEIRS OF THE R-2 OVER THE LAND IN QUESTION ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER Case of the petitioner is that she is the wife of one V. Krishna Reddy, who stated to have purchased an extent of 08 Acres of land in Survey No.198 New No.198/755 situated at Mahadevakodigehalli Village, Jala Hobli, Bangalore North Additional Taluk, in terms of Deed of Sale dated 31.03.1984 and ever since then the petitioner's husband and their family - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4681 WP No. 5652 of 2022 have been in possession and enjoyment of the said land. That though the name of the husband of the petitioner was reflected in the revenue records for the years 1988-1989 to 1995-1996, subsequently, the same has not been continued on and of the year 1997. That the husband of the petitioner passed away on 19.09.2019 leaving behind the petitioner and other legal representatives to succeed to his estate. That Respondent No.6- The Special Land Acquisition Officer -II of KIADB, had issued Preliminary Notification dated 26.12.2006 and Final Notification dated 10.04.2008 seeking to acquire total extent of 20 Acres of land belonging to the joint family of the petitioner, which included an extent of 04 Acres of land out of 08 Acres which was purchased by the husband of the petitioner. That the 2nd respondent - The Special Deputy Commissioner-I, Bangalore North Sub-Division, Bangalore, had initiated proceedings under Section 136(3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, in case No. RRT(2)(NA) CR.157/2008-2009, pursuant to a letter dated 22.11.2008 issued by the Tahasildar, Bangalore North Additional Taluk, questioning the genuineness of the grant made in respect of the land in Survey No.198/755. That the 2nd respondent, by order dated 29.04.2014 had - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4681 WP No. 5652 of 2022 dropped the said proceedings. However, subsequently, by order dated 10.10.2014, the matter was taken up for fresh enquiry. That husband of the petitioner had participated in the said proceedings by filing Statement of Objections along with the documents. That the 2nd respondent, after hearing the parties, by order dated 13.01.2022 decided to drop the proceedings. That though husband of the petitioner had produced the Deed of Sale and revenue records in justification of his entitlement to the extent of the land purchased by him in Survey No.198/755, the 2nd respondent- Deputy Commissioner, while disposing of the said proceedings had observed that no material documents are produced by husband of the petitioner in justification of his claim. It is this observation which has given rise to the present writ petition. The petitioner is thus before this Court seeking the following reliefs: "For the reasons stated above the petitioners pray that after calling for the records and proceeds of the case this Hon'ble court be pleased to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India and issue; a) writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order to quash the order dtd.13-01-2022 passed by the respondent No.2 in case No.RRT(2) (NA) CR 157/2008- 09 Annexure-F in so for as the observation made in the impugned order at page No.7 in para No.2 that "The 2nd respondent contending that, he has purchased the said property under a registered sale deed dated 05.04.1984. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:4681 WP No. 5652 of 2022 However to substantiate the same, he has not produced any material documents. Therefore I am of the opinion that there is no force in the contention of legal heirs of the 2nd respondent over the land in question". b) to direct the respondent No.6 to release the compensation in respect to the land measuring 4-00 acres in Sy.No.198/755 situated at Mahadevakodigehalli village, Jala Hobli, Bangalore North Addl. Taluk., in favour of petitioner as per the claim statement dated 10.03.2022 Annexure-L. c) writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate order to direct the respondent No.1 to mutate the name of the petitioner in RTC pertaining to land measuring 4-00 acres in Sy.No.198/755 situated at Mahadevakodigehalli village, Jala Hobli, Bangalore North Addl. Taluk., on the basis of registered sale deed dtd.31.3.1984/5.4.1984. d) any other appropriate writ or order or direction that be deemed fit to grant under the facts and circumstances of the case, be passed in the interest of justice and equity. e) Writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order to quash the order dtd.30-01-2024 passed by the respondent No.6 in case No. KIADB/BD/SLAO No.3477/2022-23 Annexure-М.” 2. One of the contentions urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, this Court on earlier occasion by order dated 08.02.2021 had quashed the order dated 29.04.2014 that had been passed by the 2nd respondent on the premise that in view of the Government Order dated 10.10.2014, power and jurisdiction to adjudicate the matters under Section 136 of the Land Revenue Act is vested with Special Deputy Commissioner of IAS Cadre and since the order therein was passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner, who - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:4681 WP No. 5652 of 2022 was not of the said Cadre, the order was set aside as he was not competent in terms of the said Government Order. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the same error of jurisdiction had occurred even in the instant impugned proceedings as seen at the cause title of the impugned order dated 13.01.2022 produced at Annexure-H, wherein, the designation of the Presiding Office is shown as "Arathi Anand, K.A.S., Special Deputy Commissioner-I, Bengaluru North Sub- Division, Bengaluru." Thus, submits that despite the earlier order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of KAS Cadre having been set aside for want of jurisdiction, without taking note of the said order, the error has been repeated. That apart, he submits even on merits, the observation made in the impugned order with regard to husband of the petitioner not producing the material on record is erroneous. Hence, seeks for allowing of the petition. 3. As found in the impugned order at page 6, there is an observation that the land comprised in Sy.No.198 of MahadevaKodigehalli Village had been allotted to 22 persons with 4 acres each as per the order of the Deputy Commissioner dated 28.06.1962. On 20.1.2025 while hearing the counsel for - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:4681 WP No. 5652 of 2022 the parties this Court was informed that 'the total extent of land in Survey No.198 was 252 Acres 20 Guntas'. This obvious fact had given rise to a question as to the basis and reason of assigning sub-Survey numbers upto 755 when apparently only 22 persons were granted the entire land. This intriguing factor had led this Court to direct the respondents-State to obtain instructions in this matter. Today, learned HCGP on instruction submits that from the date of grant in the year 1962 till date, as per the records maintained in the office of Survey Department only 258 phodies have been conducted. Therefore, he submits that the reference of Survey No.198/755 as claimed by the petitioner is questionable and requires enquiry in the matter. Submission taken on record. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent-KIADB supplementing the submission made by learned AGA further insist that there has been innumerable claims made by the parties claiming to have been granted portion of the land in Sy.No.198 based on certain records, which exceeds the total extent of the land comprised in the said survey number and unless the Revenue Department of the State Government clarifies the authenticity of the records issued by them it would - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:4681 WP No. 5652 of 2022 not be in a position to determine and adjudicate the claims being made by the parties. 5. Heard and perused the records. 6. On perusal of records and on consideration of the submissions noted above, it is clear the respondents-State has to come clear with regard to the authenticity and genuineness of the claim being made by parties including the petitioner of they having been granted portions of land forming part of Sy.No.198 of MahadevaKodigehalli Village. 7. Not withstanding the above, the petition may have to be allowed in view of the order impugned having been passed by an Authority without jurisdiction which had already been taken note of by this Court in its earlier order passed by this Court in W.P.No.34231/2014 disposed of on 8.02.2021 as referred above. On that ground, the impugned order has to be set aside. 8. In view of discrepancies pointed out with regard to the phodi, in the factual aspect of the matter, this Court deems fit and appropriate that further directions is required in the matter. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:4681 WP No. 5652 of 2022 9. Accordingly, the following: ORDER (i) Writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order at Annexure-H is set aside only for the reason as the same having been passed by an Officer who is not of an IAS Cadre as per the Government order dated 10.10.2014. The respondents-State shall ensure that the matter be assigned to the Deputy Commissioner of IAS Cadre as required under the order dated 10.10.2014 ; (iii) In view of the facts emanating from the records and in view of the submission made on instructions by learned HCGP that the assignment of Survey No.198/755 as claimed by the petitioner is not forthcoming from the records, the respondents-Authorities shall conduct an enquiry about the genuineness of the claims being made by the parties and such enquiry be conducted by issuing notice to all the parties/persons who claimed to have been allotted portions of land in the said Survey No.198 of MahadevaKodigehalli Village. Such exercise shall be undertaken by the respondents-State through an Officer referred to above and matter be concluded - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:4681 WP No. 5652 of 2022 within an outer limit of six months from the date of receipt of the copy of the certified copy of this order. (iv) Consequently, Annexure-M dated 30.01.2024 passed by the respondent-the Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO- II), Bengaluru, is also set aside. SD/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE tsn* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28