- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20567 WP NO.13555 OF 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.13555 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. M.M. SERVOTHAMA GOWDA S/O. LATE MEENAKSHI GOWDA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, RESIDING AT SHIRUGURU, MELINAKOPPA, NONABUR POST, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - -577 432. 2. M.M. MUNIRAJU S/O LATE. MEENAKSHI GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCCU: AGRICULTURIST, RESIDING AT SHIRUGURU, MELINAKOPPA, NONABUR POST, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 432. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. KRISHNA B.J., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20567 WP NO.13555 OF 2025 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 225. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SHIVAMOGGA SUB-DIVISION, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 225. 4. THE TAHASILDAR, THIRATHAHALLI TALUK, THIRATHAHALLI, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 432. 5. SRI. GURUMURTHY S/O GOPAL GOWDA AGE: MAJOR, RESIDING AT SIRIGARU, MELINAKOPPA VILLAGE, NONABUR POST, THIRATHAHALLI TALUK - 577 432. 6. SRI. SATHYAMURTHY S/O GOPAL GOWDA AGE: MAJOR, RESIDING AT SIRIGARU, MELINAKOPPA VILLAGE, NONABUR POST, THIRATHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 432. 7. SMT. SHESHAMMA, W/O LATE. NAGAPPA, AGE: MAJOR, RESIDING AT ALUGOLLA MALLESHWARA, THIRATHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 432. 8. SRI. RATNAKARA, S/O NAGAPPAGOWDA, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20567 WP NO.13555 OF 2025 AGE: MAJOR RESIDING AT ALUGOLLA, MALLESHWARA THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 432. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SIDDHARTH BABURAO, AGA FOR R1 TO R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED IN REVISION PETITION NO. 52/2018 (REVENUE) DATED 21ST MARCH, 2025 BY THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURE-H; SET-ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2-DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, SHIVAMOGGA IN R.A. NO.16/2012-13 DATED 01ST MARCH, 2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-J; SET-ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3-ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SHIVAMOGGA SUB-DIVISION, SHIVAMOGGA IN R.A. NO.38/2010-11, DATED 09TH AUGUST, 2011 VIDE ANNEXURE-K; AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Sri. Siddharth Baburao, learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondents 1 to 4. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the order dated 21st March, 2025 (Annexure-H) passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Revision Petition No.52/2018; - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20567 WP NO.13555 OF 2025 order dated 01st March, 2018 (Annexure-J) passed by the respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner in R.A. No.16/2012-13; and order dated 09th August, 2011 (Annexure-K) passed by the respondent No.3-Assistant Commissioner in R.A. No.38/2010- 11. 3. It is the case of petitioners that the land measuring to an extent of 4 acres in Survey No.202 of Siruguru Village, Thirthahalli Taluk, Shivamogga District was granted in favour of one late Nagappa Gowda S/o Sheshaiah Gowda who is the husband of the respondent No.7 as per the order of grant dated 05th March, 1977. It is also stated that the land to an extent of 4 acres has been granted in favour of late Sheshadri Gowda S/o Meenakshi Gowda in Survey No.202 of the said Siruguru Village. Thereafter, the mutation entries have been changed in favour of the grantees as per M.R. No.1/77-78 and M.R. No.3/1980-81, respectively. It is further stated in the petition that the vendor of the petitioners had purchased the land in question from the original grantees and accordingly, original records were transferred in favour of the vendor of the petitioners. The R.T.C. Extracts from the year-2001 to 2011 are - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20567 WP NO.13555 OF 2025 produced at Annexure-F series to demonstrate that the land in question is in the possession of the petitioners. Tax paid receipts are also produced at Annexure-G series. In the meanwhile, the land in question to an extent of 20 acre 36 guntas in Survey No.202 of the said Siruguru Village was classified as Sarkari Beelu and in this regard, petitioners have made an application to remove the same. It is also forthcoming from the petition that the respondent-Authorities have arrived at a conclusion that the land in question is a Forest Land and the vendor of the petitioners was cultivating in excess of land in question and accordingly, modified the revenue entries made in favour of the petitioners. Thereafter, the proceedings have reached the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Revision Petition No.52/2018 and the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, by order dated 21st March, 2025 (Annexure-H), dismissed the revision petition preferred by the petitioners and consequently, confirmed the order dated 01st March, 2018 (Annexure-J) passed by the respondent No.2 in R.A. No.16/2012-13. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners are before this Court. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20567 WP NO.13555 OF 2025 4. Heard Sri. B.J. Krishna, learned counsel appearing for petitioners and Sri. Siddharth Baburao, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 4. 5. Sri. B.J. Krishna, learned counsel appearing for petitioners submitted that the respondent No.3, had cancelled the grant made in favour of the petitioners, after an inordinate delay of more than thirty four years and therefore, the impugned orders passed by the respondent-Authorities and the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal requires to be interfered with in this writ petition. It is also submitted by learned counsel appearing for petitioners that the respondents 2 and 3 have failed to consider the fact that the grantees have perfected their title by way of adverse possession and therefore, the purchase of the land in question by the petitioners from their vendors is just and proper. Accordingly, he sought for interference of this Court. 6. Per contra, Sri. Siddharth Baburao, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 4 submit that the land in question belongs to Forest Department and therefore, revenue authorities have no - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20567 WP NO.13555 OF 2025 authority in law to grant the Forest land in favour of anyone much less the petitioner. Accordingly, he sought to confirm the impugned orders passed by the respondent-Authorities and the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. 7. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on careful examination of the finding recorded by the respondent-Authorities as well as the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal would indicate that the land in question has been purchased by the petitioners from the original grantees. It is also forthcoming from the finding recorded in the impugned orders that the land in question is a Forest land and the Government is in possession of the same. What is sought to be urged in this writ petition by the petitioners is in respect of the land which was being held by the vendor of the petitioners in excess than the permissible limits and therefore, no interference be called for in this writ petition. It is also to be noted that, recently the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS reported in (2025) 2 SCC 641, had laid down the guidelines with regard to consider whether the land in question - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20567 WP NO.13555 OF 2025 is Forest land or Revenue land. It is also observed that, even if the land in question has been granted by the Revenue Authorities, in which the subject land belongs to the Forest land, such grant will not create a right in favour of the grantees in respect of the Forest land. In that view of the matter, following the law declared by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD (supra), I am of the view that the finding recorded by the respondents 2 and 3 and Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, holding the land in question is Forest land is just and proper and I do not find any merit in the petition. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed. SD/- (E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35