- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16888 WP No. 12021 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 12021 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. CHANDRAHASA J S/0 KB JAYARAM ALIAS JAYARAM KN AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 17/9, 0TH A MAIN, 4TH BLOCK, NANDINI LAYOUT, NEAR SHIVA TEMPLE, BANGALORE 500096 …PETITIONER (BY Ms. LENITA MATHIAS., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. P PRITHVI KIRAN SETTY., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEMPEGOWDA ROAD, BEHIND KANDAYA BHAVANA, BANGALORE-560009 3. THE TAHSILDAR MINIVIDHANA SOUDA YELAHANKA TALUK, BANGALORE 560064 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.MANJUNATH., HCGP) Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16888 WP No. 12021 of 2025 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DTD 11.03.2025 ISSUED BY THE R-3 AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN LND(NA)CR60/13-14 UNDER SEC 104 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT, 1964, AT ANNX-A, 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. This Writ Petition is filed challenging a show-cause notice issued to the petitioner under Section 104 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (ACT) in which it is sought to be contended that the petitioner is in unauthorized occupation. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that there was an earlier litigation between the petitioner and the Thasildar which had ended in favour of the petitioner and despite there also being a decree of a Civil Court, it is sought to be contended that the petitioner is in unauthorized occupation and hence the entire proceedings are without jurisdiction. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16888 WP No. 12021 of 2025 3. In my view, it would be appropriate to direct the petitioner to file objections raising all such contentions, as are permissible, if the objections are not already filed. On such being objections being filed, the Thasildar shall consider the same and thereafter pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. 4. The petitioner shall also be afforded a reasonable period of 30 days to prefer an appeal, if the order goes against the petitioner. Until then, no precipitative action shall be taken by the Thasildar. This Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. 5. 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.: 66