- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4321 WP No. 20179 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 20179 OF 2024 (KLR-REG) BETWEEN: S Y KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE M YELLAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT NO 62, 57TH CROSS, NEAR ICICI BANK RENUKA NAGAR SARJAPURA, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT 562125 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRINIVAS V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560001 Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4321 WP No. 20179 of 2024 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT KANDYA BHAVAN, K.G. DOUBLE ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001 3. THE TAHASILDHAR ANEKAL TALUK ANEKAL - 562 106 …RESPONDENTS BY SMT. B.P.RADHA, AGA) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS FATHER UNDER FORM NO.53 DATED 10.11.1998 VIDE ANNEXURE-C OF WRIT PETITION; DIRECT THE R-3 / LAND TRIBUNAL TO REGULARIZE THE UNAUTHORIZED CULTIVATION OF THE PETITIONER WITH RESPECT TO SURVEY NUMBER 435 OF SARJAPURA VILLAGE, MEASURING 1 ACRE 20 GUNTAS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING - 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4321 WP No. 20179 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned petition is filed seeking direction against respondents to consider the application tendered by petitioner's father under Form No.53 dated 10.11.1998 as per Annexure - C. 2. The learned Additional Government Advocate, Smt.B.P. Radha, upon receiving instructions, submits that the petitioner's father has not submitted any application requesting regularization of his alleged unauthorized occupation. As a result, the respondents contend that they are under no legal obligation to consider or decide upon the eligibility of the petitioner's father for such regularization. It is asserted that, in the absence of any formal request, there exists no requirement for the concerned authorities to take further action in this regard. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4321 WP No. 20179 of 2024 3. In response, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently disputes the submission made by the respondents. He places reliance on Annexure-C, which is a copy of Form No.53, purportedly submitted by the petitioner's father. It is pointed out that this document bears an official seal, which signifies that the application was received by the Competent Authority on 10.11.1998. The petitioner argues that the presence of this official seal is prima facie evidence of submission, thereby contradicting the assertion made by the respondents. 4. Considering the conflicting claims, this Court deems it necessary to direct the concerned Authority to conduct a detailed inquiry into the matter. The Tahsildar, being the Competent Officer, shall scrutinize the endorsement affixed to Form No.53 and verify whether the application was indeed received by his office on 10.11.1998. A comprehensive inquiry shall be undertaken to ascertain the authenticity of the application, its receipt, and any corresponding records maintained in the office of the Tahsildar. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4321 WP No. 20179 of 2024 5. In light of the above, this Court passes the following: ORDER i) The writ petition is allowed; ii) Respondent No.3 – Tahsildar is directed to conduct a preliminary inquiry to determine whether the petitioner's father had indeed submitted an application in Form No.53, seeking regularization of his occupation. The inquiry shall focus on verifying the existence and authenticity of the application that is alleged to have been received by the office of Respondent No.3 – Tahsildar on 10.11.1998; iii) If, upon such verification, the Authority is satisfied that an application was duly submitted in Form No.53, the Tahsildar shall proceed to process the request in accordance with the procedure laid down under Section 108CCC of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966; - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:4321 WP No. 20179 of 2024 iv) If, however, the preliminary inquiry concludes that no such application was ever submitted, the Tahsildar shall issue an appropriate endorsement to the petitioner, clearly stating the findings of the inquiry; and v) The entire exercise, including the preliminary inquiry and any consequential action, shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE KG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2