- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20569 WP NO.16636 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.16636 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. BALAKRISHNA GOWDA, S/O LATE HUKRAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS. 2. PARAMESHWARA GOWDA S/O LATE HUKRAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS. 3. HARIYAPPA GOWDA S/O LATE HUKRAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS. 4. GULABI D/O LATE HUKRAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS. 5. RAGHAVA GOWDA S/O LATE HUKRAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS. 6. RAMACHANDRA S/O LATE HUKRAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS. 7. SMT. LOKESHWARI W/O LATE YELLIANNA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS. 8. RAKSHITHA M.Y. D/O LATE YELLIANNA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS. Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20569 WP NO.16636 OF 2025 9. AMITHA M.Y. D/O LATE YELLIANNA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS. ALL THE PETITIONERS ARE R/AT MUNDUGARU HOUSE, KALANJA VILLAGE AND POST, SULLIA TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 212. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY G., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MANGALURU, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 575 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER PUTTUR SUB-DIVISION, PUTTUR, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 201. 3. THE TAHSILDAR SULLIA, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 212. 4. M. SUBRAMANYA S/O N. RAMACHANDRAYYA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/AT MUNDUGARU HOUSE, KALANJA VILLAGE, SULLIA TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 212. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 22ND APRIL, 2025 PASSED IN R.A.P. NO.102/2024 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1-DEPUTY - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20569 WP NO.16636 OF 2025 COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, DAKSHINA KANNADA VIDE ANNEXURE-A; 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 Smt. Navya Shekhar, learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondents 1 to 3. 2. In this writ petition, petitioners are assailing the order dated 22nd April, 2025 (Annexure-A) passed by the respondent No.1 in R.A.P. No.102/2024. 3. Heard Sri. G. Balakrishna Shastry, learned counsel appearing for petitioners and Smt. Navya Shekhar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 3. 4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the writ petition, the same would indicate that the respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner had remanded the matter to the respondent No.3-Tahsildar to take fresh decision in the matter taking into consideration the finding recorded at paragraphs 9 and 10 in the impugned order - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20569 WP NO.16636 OF 2025 dated 22nd April, 2025 (Annexure-A). In that view of the matter, since the respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner had remanded the matter to the respondent No.3 to take fresh decision in the matter, I am of the view that no interference be called for in this writ petition. However, I find force in the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that, in the impugned order dated 22nd April, 2025 (Annexure-A), the respondent No.1 had stated that the petitioners herein are not necessary parties in the proceedings before the respondent No.3. To that extent, it is made clear that the order of remand made by the respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner is just and proper and the respondent No.3, while considering the issue afresh, shall taken decision in the matter only after affording an opportunity to the parties including the petitioners and the respondent No.4 herein in accordance with law at the earliest. In the result, writ petition is allowed-in-part. SD/- (E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37