- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:12471 WP No. 8304 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 8304 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. NAGESHA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O.LATE.MUNIYAPPA RESIDING AT NO.62, PANATHUR VILLAGE AND POST VARTHUR HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK-560103. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MAHENDRA KUMAR S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BANGALORE NORTH SUB-DIVISION BENGALURU-560002. 3. THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR BANGALORE EAST TALUK BENGALURU-560036. 4. SRI.SUBRAMANYA.P.R. AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, S/O.LATE.KOTE RAMAIAH RESIDING AT NO.64, 4TH CROSS, MARAMMA TEMPLE ROAD, Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:12471 WP No. 8304 of 2025 PANATHUR VILLAGE, VARTHUR HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU-560 103. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH.K., HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3; VIDE ORDER DATED:25.03.2025, NOTICE TO R-4 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER (ANNEXURE-A) DATED 27-02-2025 PASSED ON IMPLEADING APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 1 RULE 10 READ WITH SEC.151 C.P.C ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BANGALORE NORTH SUB- DIVISION, BANGALORE IN RA (BET) 540/2024, AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE IMPLEADING APPLICATION PERMITTING THE PETITIONER TO IMPLEAD HIMSELF IN THE SAID PROCEEDINGS AS SOUGHT FOR, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. The Assistant Commissioner initiated suo motu proceedings and as a consequence, the respondent No.4 presented W.P. No.7918/2023 before this Court contending that he was granted two acres in Sy.No.54, situated at Panathur village, Varthur Hobli of Bengaluru East Taluk and saguvali chit was issued in his favour on 17.05.1978. He also - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:12471 WP No. 8304 of 2025 contended that subsequently, mutation proceedings had also taken place, but his name was not reflected in the RTC and he contended that despite several representations, the Thasildar has not taken any action to enter his name. 2. This Court by an order dated 11.04.2023 directed the Thasildar to verify the grant and to take appropriate action on the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law. 3. The Thasildar, on consideration of the petitioner's application, came to the conclusion that the land in question was a Government Mufat Kaval land and vide M.R. No.15/1980-81 the name of respondent No.4 was ordered to be entered and hence he requested the Assistant Commissioner to initiate the proceedings under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (ACT) and take further action. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:12471 WP No. 8304 of 2025 4. The Assistant Commissioner, accordingly, registered the appeal under Section 136(2) of the Act and initiated the proceedings. 5. In these proceedings, the petitioner therein who also claim to be the original grantee of this very land made an application to implead himself as respondent. The Assistant Commissioner has rejected this request and consequently, the petitioner is before this Court by way of this appeal. 6. In my view, since the petitioner is also claiming that there is a grant in his favour and his name is also required to be recorded in the revenue records, the Assistant Commissioner ought to have allowed the application for impleading and permitted the petitioner herein to participate in the proceedings as respondent. 7. In that view of the matter, the impugned order passed by the Assistant Commissioner is set aside - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:12471 WP No. 8304 of 2025 and the application filed by the petitioner for impleading is allowed. 8. The petitioner shall also be impleaded as respondent No.2 and he shall be entitled to participate in the proceedings for raising objections. 9. The Assistant Commissioner to consider the plea of the Thasildar, the plea of respondent No.4 as well as that of present petitioner before he passes any order on the request made by the Thasildar in the proceedings under Section 136(2) of the Act. Writ Petition is, accordingly, allowed. 10. In view of the disposal of the petition, all pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE HNM, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48