- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23137 WP NO.17892 OF 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.17892 OF 2022 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. CHANNAMMA W/O LATE H.C. SHIVANANJAIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT: HOSAGAVI VILLAGE, KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 425. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. S.R. ANURADHA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. SRINIVASA C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MANDYA DISTRICT, MANDYA - 571 401. 3. THE THASILDAR MADDUR TALUK, MADDUR, MANDYA DSITRICT - 571 428. 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANT OF Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23137 WP NO.17892 OF 2022 IN-CHARGE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER, MANDYA, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 401. 5. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS MADDUR TALUK, MADDUR, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 428. 6. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF REGIONAL LAND RECORDS U.P.O.R.BUILDING, (GOVT. BHAVANA), NAJARA BHAD, MYSURU, MYSURU DISTRICT - 570 010. 7. H.T. MULIGOWDA S/O THIMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS. 8. H.B. MAHESH S/O HOMBAIAH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. 9. DEVARAJ H.C. S/O CHANNAIAH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS. RESPONDENTS 7 TO 9 ARE R/AT: HOSAGAVI VILLAGE, KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 425. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH K., HCGP FOR R1 TO R6; SRI. B. RAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR R7 TO 9) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 19TH MAY, 2022 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4 VIDE ANNEXURE-P; QUASH THE - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23137 WP NO.17892 OF 2022 ENDORSEMENT DATED 24TH JUNE, 2022 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.6 VIDE ANNEXURE-Q; AND ETC. 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 In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 19th May, 2022 (Annexure-P) passed by the respondent No.4 and endorsement dated 24th June, 2022 (Annexure-Q) issued by the respondent No.6. 2. Heard Smt. S.R. Anuradha, learned Senior Counsel on behalf of Sri. Srinivasa C., appearing for the petitioner; Sri. Manjunath K., learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 6; and Sri. B. Ramesh, learned counsel appearing for respondents 7 to 9. 3. Smt. S.R. Anuradha, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner invited the attention of the Court to letter dated 27th October, 2021 (Annexure-H1) and also the RTC extracts produced in the writ petition and submitted that the letter dated 27th October, 2021 (Annexure-H1) has been addressed by the respondent No.3-Tahsildar, Maddur Taluk to - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23137 WP NO.17892 OF 2022 the respondent No.5-Assistant Director of land Records, Maddur Taluk without providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. In that view of the matter, the claim made by the petitioner with regard to 'A' Kharab land has been diminished. Accordingly, she sought for interference of this Court. 4. Sri. B. Ramesh, learned counsel appearing for respondents 7 to 9 submitted that the petitioner is entitled for an extent of 24 guntas in Survey No.207 of Hosagavi Village, Koppa Hobli, Maddur Taluk and therefore, the petitioner has no claim in respect of 'A' Kharab land. Accordingly, he sought for dismissal of the petition. 5. Sri. Manjunath K., learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 6 sought to justify the impugned order and endorsement. 6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for parties and on perusal of the index of land produced by the petitioner at Annexures 'A' to 'C' would indicate that there is a discrepancy with regard to the extent of the land in question. Perusal of the RTC extracts would indicate that the petitioner is entitled to an extent of 24 guntas as per Annexures 'D' and 'E'. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23137 WP NO.17892 OF 2022 In that view of the matter, I am of the view that the respondent No.4 had passed impugned order and the respondent No.6 had issued the impugned endorsement based on the recommendation made by the respondent No.3- Tahsildar at Annexure-H, without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in the matter. 7. Under these circumstances, impugned order dated 19th May, 2022 (Annexure-P) passed by the respondent No.4 and impugned endorsement dated 24th June, 2022 (Annexure- Q) issued by the respondent No.6 are hereby quashed and matter is remitted back to the respondent No.4 to consider the case of the petitioner as well as respondents 7 to 9 afresh, after affording an opportunity of hearing in respect of the claim made by the petitioner. 8. In order to avoid further delay in the matter, as the parties are represented by their respective counsels, parties are directed to appear before the respondent No.4 on 28th July, 2025 at 3.00 p.m. with all the relevant documents to enable the respondent No.4 to take decision in the matter. It is further directed that the respondent No.4 shall consider the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23137 WP NO.17892 OF 2022 issue afresh and take decision in the matter within an outer limit of six months from the date of appearance of the parties before the said authority. With this observation writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 62