- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4633 WP No. 21918 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 21918 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. SYED TAJUDDIN S/O. LATE SYED RIYAZUDDIN AGED 54 YEARS, NO.337, 9TH CROSS, OPP:NOORANI MASJID, ILYASNAGAR MAIN ROAD, NEAR ORIENTAL SCHOOL, J.P. NAGAR POST, BANGALORE-560078 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAHAMATHULLA KOTHWAL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA K., ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4633 WP No. 21918 of 2024 RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 30.05.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO AWARD COMPENSATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW VIDE ANNEXURES-A AND B RESPECTIVELY DATED 30.05.2024. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER This petition is filed seeking direction at the hands of this Court directing the respondents to consider petitioner's representation dated 30.05.2024 submitted by the petitioner which is in regard to claim of compensation for having utilized the petitioner's property. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for respondents. 3. The petitioner asserts that his grandfather was granted the property in question bearing Site No.133/134, measuring a total of 01 acre 03 guntas in Survey No.82, situated at Katmanahalli Block, Peenya Industrial Area, Bengaluru due to his dedicated services rendered under the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4633 WP No. 21918 of 2024 administration of the then Hon'ble Ex-Chief Minister, who was a member of the Legislative Assembly. The petitioner contends that the grant was made as a recognition of his grandfather’s contributions. However, the petitioner alleges that the said property was subsequently acquired by the State, and as the legal heir of the original grantee, he is entitled to claim appropriate compensation. Despite submitting representations to the authorities, as evidenced by Annexures A and B, the petitioner contends that there has been a complete lack of response from the respondents, thereby necessitating judicial intervention. 4. The learned High Court Government Pleader (HCGP), referring to the records, has brought to the attention of this Court that the present writ petition lacks critical acquisition details necessary to establish the petitioner’s claim. It is pointed out that the petitioner has not produced any documentary evidence to substantiate his assertion that the property was originally granted to his grandfather. Furthermore, no material has been placed on record to demonstrate the alleged acquisition of the property by the State, which forms the crux of the petitioner’s claim for - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4633 WP No. 21918 of 2024 compensation. The absence of such essential documentation raises serious concerns regarding the maintainability of the petitioner’s claim at this stage. 5. Upon careful consideration of the submissions made by both parties and after perusing the records, this Court is of the opinion that it would be premature to issue any specific directions in the absence of substantial documentary evidence. The petitioner has primarily relied on the Record of Rights to assert his claim, but such reliance, without supporting acquisition details, is insufficient to warrant the relief sought. However, this Court takes note of the fact that the petitioner’s grandfather’s name was indeed reflected in the RTC at an undisputed point in time. Given this, the petitioner is granted the liberty to collect all necessary and relevant documents, including those pertaining to the alleged acquisition of the property. Should the petitioner gather and submit a comprehensive representation with the required documentation to the concerned respondents, it shall be incumbent upon the respondents to conduct a thorough enquiry into the matter. If the situation so warrants, appropriate further action shall be initiated in accordance with the law. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4633 WP No. 21918 of 2024 With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed off. HJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11 SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE