- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:285 WP No. 20105 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.20105 OF 2024 (KLR-REG) BETWEEN: SATHYANARAYANA S/O NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS HOSUR VILLAGE KAIWARA HOBLI CHINTAMANI TALUK CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT PIN - 563125 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRASANNA D P, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560001 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT CHIKKABALLAPURA - 562101 3. THE TAHSILDHAR CHINTAMANI TALUK CHINTAMANI - 563125 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.B.P.RADHA, AGA) Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:285 WP No. 20105 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONER DATED 18.04.2024, AS PER ANNEXURE-B EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned writ petition is filed seeking mandamus against respondent No.3 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 18.04.2024 evidenced at Annexure-B. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. 3. As rightly pointed out by the learned Additional Government Advocate (AGA), the petitioner has expressly acknowledged that possession of the land in question has already been taken, and the property is now under the ownership and control of the Karnataka - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:285 WP No. 20105 of 2024 Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB). Consequently, the petitioner’s claim of being an unauthorized occupant and his subsequent request for regularization of such unauthorized occupation are rendered entirely infructuous. 4. While it is true that the documents produced by the petitioner, particularly Annexure-C, do not explicitly indicate the fact of possession being taken by the State, the learned AGA has effectively demonstrated that this fact is reflected in the copy of the document furnished to the State authorities. The said copy clearly establishes that the petitioner was fully aware of and acknowledged the taking of possession by the State. This creates a factual inconsistency in the petitioner’s claims, undermining the credibility of his assertions regarding unauthorized occupation and any potential claim for regularization. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:285 WP No. 20105 of 2024 5. In view of the above-discussed factual matrix, it is evident to this Court that the petitioner is well aware that the land in question has already been acquired by the KIADB and no longer remains available for regularization or any alternative claim of ownership. The petitioner’s present attempt appears to be an indirect effort to assert a right over the property, possibly with the intention of laying claim to compensation arising out of the acquisition. It is pertinent to note that the land in question was surplus land owned by the State, and with the subsequent acquisition by the KIADB, the petitioner’s assertions and claims lack merit and legal standing. 6. Given these circumstances, this Court finds no justification for granting any further indulgence to the petitioner. The acquisition process undertaken by the KIADB renders the petitioner’s claims untenable, and his request does not warrant any further consideration. Therefore, the petitioner’s plea is devoid of substance and cannot be entertained. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:285 WP No. 20105 of 2024 Therefore, the writ petition is devoid of merits and accordingly, stands dismissed. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13