- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2675 WP No. 9321 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.9321 OF 2024 (LR) BETWEEN: SRI.SHIVANNA S/O LATE DASAPPA AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS R/O HONNAGONDANAHALLI HONNAGONDANAHALLI POST SIRA TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT KARNATAKA-572137 SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED …PETITIONER (BY SRI.VIVEK S, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDI BENGALURU-560001 KARNATAKA, INDIA 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TUMAKURU OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TUMAKURU TOWN KARNATAKA-572 101 Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2675 WP No. 9321 of 2024 3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MADHUGIRI SUB DIVISION MADHUGIRI-572 132 4. TAHSILDAR TALUK OFFICE SIRA TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT KARNATAKA-572 137 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.SAVITHRAMMA, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED NOTIFICATION BEARING NO.BHUUUNI.COM.GRAM(2E)(02),06 /22-23, DTD 19.04.22 ISSUED BY R2 (PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC. 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 In the captioned writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the impugned Notification dated 19.04.2022 issued by respondent No.2 – Deputy Commissioner exercising power under Section 38A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (for short 'Act, 1961') thereby declaring the petition land as an unrecorded habitation. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2675 WP No. 9321 of 2024 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned AGA appearing for the respondents. 3. The subject matter of the petition is an agricultural land bearing Sy. No.195 measuring 2 acres situated at Honnagondanahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Sira Taluk. The petitioner is asserting that he is the absolute owner of the petition land having purchased the same from his erstwhile vendor Imam Saab through registered sale deed dated 31.03.2003. The petitioner asserts that he is an agriculturalist and he is in occupation of the schedule property. 4. The petitioner is primarily aggrieved by the impugned Notification issued by respondent No.2 - Deputy Commissioner vide Annexure-A thereby notifying the petition land as an unrecorded habitation. The said order is under challenge. 5. In response to the petitioner’s prayer sought in the captioned writ petition, the State has filed a memo annexing the Report of the Tahasildar and also Google Map indicating that the petition land is now in possession of several individuals, who have put up residential houses. These documents are produced as a counter to the petitioner’s claim - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2675 WP No. 9321 of 2024 that he is still cultivating the land in question. The said memo is taken on record. 6. On meticulous examination of the documents furnished by the petitioner and the counter placed by the State, this Court is of the view that before respondent No.2 – Deputy Commissioner proceeds to notify the petition land as an unrecorded habitation, is required to first ascertain whether the petition land is a patta land or the land belongs to the State and whether the said unrecorded habitation is a part of Lambani Tanda, Gollarahatti, Vaddarahatti, Kurubarahatti, Nayakarahatti, Majare Grama, Hadi, Doddi, Palya, Camp, Colony or any such unrecorded habitation falling within the jurisdiction of that Village on the date of commencement of the amendment, which was effected in 2016. 7. 7. The petitioner to demonstrate that it is a patta land has placed reliance on the title documents, while State contends that the report submitted by respondent No.4 - Tahasildar clearly justifies the action of respondent No.2 – Deputy Commissioner in notifying the petition land as an unrecorded habitation. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2675 WP No. 9321 of 2024 8. Upon closer inspection of Section 38A of the 'Act, 1961', it becomes evident that the respondent No.2, the Deputy Commissioner, is vested with the authority to invoke Section 38- A of the 'Act 1961' under circumstances where agricultural laborers are found to be residing in dwelling houses that are built upon land which does not necessarily belong to any individual. Such lands are typically recognized as unrecorded habitations, which include settlements such as Lambani Tanda, Gollarahatti, Vaddarahatti, Kurubarahatti, Nayakarahatti, Majare Grama, Hadi, Doddi, Palya, Camp, Colony, or any similar unrecorded settlements falling under the jurisdiction of the relevant village. It is imperative that the Deputy Commissioner thoroughly evaluates whether the lands in question meet the criteria for being classified as such unrecorded habitations. 9. In the case at hand, the petitioner has made a prima-facie case that the land in dispute is Patta land, meaning it is legally recognized and belongs to an individual or entity as per the records. Therefore, respondent No.2, the Deputy Commissioner, must scrutinize whether agricultural laborers have occupied this Patta land and constructed their dwelling - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:2675 WP No. 9321 of 2024 houses upon it, or if it pertains to land owned by the State Government. It is the duty of respondent No.2 to assess whether the prerequisites set forth in Section 38A of the 'Act, 1961' are satisfied in this case, which would justify the action of notifying this land as an unrecorded habitation. The impugned notification issued by the Deputy Commissioner fails to address these essential requisites outlined in Section 38A, raising concerns about its validity and application. 10. While the Google Map submitted by the learned AGA presents a prima-facie indication of residential houses being situated on land identified as Sy. No.195, the central issue that requires careful consideration is whether this land can legally be classified as an unrecorded habitation under the authority granted by Section 38A of the 'Act, 1961', particularly if it is confirmed to be Patta land. This is a crucial point that must be thoroughly examined by respondent No.2, the Deputy Commissioner. Furthermore, the petitioner must be granted an opportunity to present their case, ensuring that due process is followed before any decision is made to designate this land as an unrecorded habitation. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:2675 WP No. 9321 of 2024 11. Should the Deputy Commissioner, upon investigation, conclude that the land in question is indeed Patta land, it would not be permissible to classify it as an unrecorded habitation under Section 38A of the 'Act, 1961'. In such a scenario, the petitioner would retain the civil remedy to seek possession of the land through legal proceedings. The petitioner can be referred to the appropriate Civil Court where they may pursue steps to secure possession of the land upon which several agricultural laborers have constructed their dwelling houses. This legal avenue remains available to the petitioner if the notification is determined to be improper or inapplicable in this case. 12. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following; ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned Notification dated 19.04.2022 bearing No.BhuUuNi.Com. Gram(2E)(02):06/22-23 issued by respondent No.2 - Deputy Commissioner is hereby quashed and the matter - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:2675 WP No. 9321 of 2024 stands remitted to respondent No.2 – Deputy Commissioner. (iii) All contentions are kept open. (iv) Since the petitioner is represented by his learned counsel, without expecting any further notice, he shall appear before respondent No.2 – Deputy Commissioner on 12.02.2025. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15