- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14910 WP No. 9073 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 9073 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MOHAMMED HANIF AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, S/O MOHIDDIN SAB 2. ABDUL WAHAB SAB AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, S/O MOHIDDIN SAB 3. ABDUL LATHIF AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, S/O MOHIDDIN SAB 4. TABREJ AHAMMED AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, D/O SHABBIR AHAMMED ALL ARE R/O SULEBAILU VILLAGE, SHIVAMOGGA 577 202 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. GOPAL K B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, SHIVAMOGGA 577 201 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER SHIVAMOGGA SUB DIVISION, SHIVAMOGGA 577 201 3. THE TAHASILDAR Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14910 WP No. 9073 of 2024 SHIVAMOGGA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA 577 201 4. ARUNACHALAM SECRETARY, URAGDURU SULEBAILU SITE OWNERS ASSOCIATION, SHIVAMOGGA 577 202 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V.SHIVA REDDY., AGA FOR R-1 TO R-3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 07.08.2023 PASSED BY THE R-1 IN RA 104/2022, VIDE ANNEXURE-E AND THE ORDER DTD 22.04.2022 PASSED BY THE R-2 IN CASE NO. PDA 55/2021-22 VIDE ANNEXURE-D, 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 application to mutate the name of the petitioner was made on the basis of a decree and the same was accepted by the Tahsildar. 2. However, Uragaduru Sulebailu Site Allottees Association filed an Appeal to the Assistant Commissioner and contended that the Area Development Officer had issued hakku patras in - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14910 WP No. 9073 of 2024 respect of the sites formed in Sy.Nos.299, 300, 332, 336 and also Sy.No.8 and 105 of Uragaduru and this Court in W.P.No.10732/1998 had allowed the Writ Petition filed by the Urugaduru Sulebylu Niveshanadarara Sangha and directed the Authorities to implement the order the Deputy Commissioner dated 05.04.1988 and accept the fee levied in pursuant to the order in respect of the sights purchased by the members of the said Sangha and, therefore, the question of the petitioners' name being entered in the RTC would not be tenable. 3. This order of the Assistant Commissioner has been confirmed in revision by the Deputy Commissioner and, as a consequence, the petitioners are before this Court. 4. As stated above, if a layout has been formed in the lands in question including Sy.No.105, over which the petitioners are making a claim and an order has already passed by this Court in W.P.No.10732/1998 - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14910 WP No. 9073 of 2024 on the basis of which the allotment made to various persons were affirmed, the question of the revenue entries being mutated in favour of the petitioners on the premise that it is an agriculture land could not arise. 5. The Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner were therefore justified in passing the impugned orders. 6. I find no merit in the Writ Petition and this Writ Petition is therefore dismissed. 7. 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.: 2