- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:12768 WP No. 9554 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 9554 OF 2022 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. HANUMEGOWDA, S/O LATE HUCCHAMARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, RESIDING AT GAVI NAGAMANGALA VILLAGE, MAADBAL HOBLI, MAGADI TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 120. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SIDDAMALLAPPA P.M, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, LOCAL BODY AN RURAL DEVELOPMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TALUK PANCHAYATH, MAGADI, RAMANAGAR DISTRICT - 562 120. 3. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, TALUK PANCHAYATH, MAGADI, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 120. 4. AJJANAHALLI GRAM PANCHAYATH, MAGADI TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 120. Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:12768 WP No. 9554 of 2022 5. SMT. GANGAMMA WIFE OF LATE KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, RESIDING AT GAVI NAGAMANGALA VILLAGE, MAADBAL HOBLI, MAGADI TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 120. 6. SRI. LOKESHA, SON OF LATE KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS RESIDING AT GAVI NAGAMANGALA VILLAGE MAADBAL HOBLI, MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 120. 7. SRI. G.K. NAGARAJ SON OF LATE KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS RESIDING AT GAVI NAGAMANGALA VILLAGE, MAADBAL HOBLI, MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 120. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.P. YOGANNA, AGA FOR R1; SRI. M.S. DEVARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4; SRI. B.T. INDU SHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R5 TO R7) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 21.12.2019 PASSED BY THE R2 IN CASE NO.C.R.10/2019-20 BY THE R2 AS PER ANNEXURE-D. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:12768 WP No. 9554 of 2022 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition seeking for setting aside the order dated 21.12.2019 at Annexure- D. 2. The Executive Officer and Appellate Authority had entertained an appeal by respondents 5 to 7, filed against the decision of the Panchayat not to effect Khata. 3. The application for Khata was made by the legal representatives of Siddappa alias Kariyappa. The Authority concerned has allowed the appeal and ordered for effecting of Khata on the basis of Pavati Khata. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that he has a property adjacent i.e. on the southern side and there is a pathway existing adjacent to the constructed portion of the private respondents which if blocked, would result in the petitioner not having any place to move around. Accordingly, the Appellate Order at Annexure - D has been challenged. 5. It is to be noticed that the scope of the proceedings at Annexure-D is limited to the application of the legal representatives of Kariyappa consequent to his death to - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:12768 WP No. 9554 of 2022 effect Khata on the basis of 'Pavati' i.e. inheritance upon death. 6. Needless to state that the Authority has effected Khata commensurate with the measurement as reflected in the earlier Khata standing in the name of Kariyappa. If it is a case of the petitioner that his right of way has been encroached, it is up to the petitioner to take appropriate proceedings independently to challenge either the Khata or work out his remedies before the Civil Court as may be deemed appropriate. Accordingly, in light of the limited scope of order at Annexure-D, the Court in writ proceedings cannot enlarge the scope of the proceedings at Annexure - D in the present proceedings. 7. Accordingly, the petition is rejected while the petitioner's grievances are kept open to be raised before the appropriate Forum. Accordingly, the petition is disposed off. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE DHA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10 / CT: BHK