- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2189 WP No. 22829 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.22829 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SMT.SUJATHA D/O H R RUDRE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS RESIDENT OF HARAMAKKI VILLAGE GONIBIDU HOBLI MUDIGERE TALUK CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT - 577101 …PETITIONER (BY SRI.G CHANDRASHEKHARAIAH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 4TH FLOOR, VIKAS SOUDHA AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE 560001 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CHIKMAGALUR SUB DIVISION CHIKMAGALURU CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT - 577 101 3. THE TAHASILDAR MUDIGERE TALUK MUDIGERE CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT - 577 101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.B.P.RADHA, AGA) Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2189 WP No. 22829 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS FROM THE OFFICE OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT - ASST. COMMISSIONER CHIKKAMAGALUR SUB-DIVISION, CHIKKAMAGALUR IN NO.BAHU/CR/62/2023 AND QUASH THE ORDER DATED 20/09/2023 PASSED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT IN BHU/CR/62/2023, VIDE ANNEXURE-J 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 Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued against the order passed by respondent No. 2 – Assistant Commissioner, as evidenced in Annexure-J. The petitioner contends that the Assistant Commissioner, in contravention of the procedure prescribed under Section 108K of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, improperly set aside the mutation certifying the petitioner's name based on the grant. The learned counsel further asserts that the Grant Order was not the subject matter of the enquiry. However, this Court is not persuaded to accept these arguments. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2189 WP No. 22829 of 2024 2. While the arguments presented appear compelling at first glance, a closer examination of the impugned order reveals that the petitioner's grant was indeed subjected to an enquiry. The Authority, in compliance with the provisions of Section 108K of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, concluded that the grant stands cancelled on the ground that no supporting records were found. Consequently, this Court finds that the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy available by way of an appeal under Section 49 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Reserving liberty to the petitioner to pursue such a remedy, the writ petition is hereby disposed of. All contentions are left open for adjudication in the appropriate forum. The Registry shall forthwith return all the certified copies after securing photocopies of the same. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2189 WP No. 22829 of 2024 In the event the appeal is filed within a period of four weeks, the time spent before this Court shall be excluded by extending the benefit under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11