- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22412 WP No. 10239 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.10239 OF 2021 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: T.P. JAYANNA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS S/O T.L.PATHAPPA TARAHUNSE GRAMA JALA HOBLI, YELAHANKA TALUK BENGALURU NORTH-560 056. …PETITIONER (BY SRI AJESH KUMAR S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S.BUILDING AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU NORTH (ADDITIONAL) TALUK BENGALURU-560 001. 3. JOINT DIRECTOR LAND RECORDS BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU-560 001. Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22412 WP No. 10239 of 2021 4. THE TAHSILDAR YELAHANKA TALUK BENGALURU-560 064 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MANJUNATH K., H.C.G.P.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED BEARING NOTICE DATED 20-6-2020 AT ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER-I PERTAINING TO SY.NO.87/P-23 AD- MEASURING 2 ACRES SITUATED IN YELAHANKA TALUK, HESSARGHATTA HOBLI, TARAHUNSE GRAMA AND AFFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DATED 28-8-2012; (b) ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONDUCT A SURVEY AND PODI THE LAND THEREOF IN SY.NO.87/P-23 ADMEASURING 2 ACRES SITUATED IN YELAHANKA TALUK, HESSARGHATTA HOBLI, TARAHUNSE GRAMA. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, petitioner is assailing the impugned notice dated 20.06.2020 (Annexure-A) passed by Respondent No.2 dated 28.08.2012 interalia sought for direction to the respondent authorities to conduct survey and phodi in respect of the subject land. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22412 WP No. 10239 of 2021 2. Heard Shri Ajesh Kumar.S., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri.Manjunath.K., learned HCGP appearing for the respondent/authorities. 3. Shri Ajesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner invited the attention of the Court to the order dated 28.08.2012 passed by Respondent No.2 at Annexure-F and submitted that the suo-motu revisional jurisdiction was invoked in the aforementioned proceedings, which came to be dropped by order dated 28.08.2012 and thereafter, Respondent No.2 has issued the fresh notice as per Annexure-A, which requires to be set aside by this Court on the ground that the Respondent No.2 has no jurisdiction to review its own order under any of the statute. 4. Per contra, the learned HCGP sought to justify the impugned order. 5. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, I have carefully - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22412 WP No. 10239 of 2021 examined the finding recorded by Respondent No.2 at Annexure-F dated 28.08.2012 wherein suo-motu proceedings has been initiated against the father of the petitioner herein in respect of the subject land and Respondent No.2 having taken note of the entire material on record, dropped the proceedings by order dated 28.08.2012 and the genuineness of the documents in respect of the grant made in favour of the father of the petitioner was confirmed. In that view of the matter, taking into consideration that the said order has reached finality and in view of the fact that the order passed by Respondent No.2 at Annexure-F is an assertive action and in that view of the matter, no review is available for the same authority, unless specifically provided in the statute. In that view of the matter, since Respondent No.2 has no jurisdiction to issue the impugned notice for the second time against the petitioner, which has already reached finality as per the order dated 28.08.2012 at Annexure-F in RRT(A)/CR.74/08-09, I find force in the submission - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22412 WP No. 10239 of 2021 made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Accordingly, this Court pass the following: ORDER i) The writ petition is allowed; ii) The impugned notice at Annexure - A is hereby quashed as the Respondent No.2 has no jurisdiction to issue the same; iii) In that view of the matter, since the writ petition is allowed by quashing the impugned notice at Annexure-A, it is open for the petitioner herein to submit application seeking phodi and durasthi, in respect of the subject land only through online. iv) If such an application is submitted by the petitioner through online, the same shall be considered at earliest by Respondent No.2. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE DH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 59