- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19468 WP No. 16975 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.16975 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. SHANTHAKUMARI W/O CHOURIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT NO.163, BEHIND MARIYAMMA TEMPLE, ANEKAL TALUK, S BENGIPURA, JIGANI BENGALURU-560105. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. HANUMANTHAPPA B. HARAVI GOWDAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CAUVERY BHAVANA, K G ROAD, BENGALURU-560009. 2. THE TAHASILDAR ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL, BENGALURU-560105. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SIDDHARTH BABURAO, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19468 WP No. 16975 of 2024 DIRECT THE 2ND RESPONDENT SHALL CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 27.03.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-G WITH IMMEDIATE EFFECT. THIS 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 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that petitioner has approached respondent No.2 seeking regularisation of unauthorised occupation of the land under S.94(c) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Amendment Rules, 2015 by filing necessary application and the same has not been considered. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, petitioner has filed a representation as per Annexure-G, dated 27.03.2022, and seeking a direction to respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated 27.03.2022, this writ petition is filed by the petitioner. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19468 WP No. 16975 of 2024 3. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated 27.03.2022 made by the petitioner, in accordance with law, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE sac List No.: 1 Sl No.: 66