- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4317 WP No. 22806 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. 22806 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: MR. MAHESH S/O LATE EARE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT MAHADEVAPURA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 438 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R SRINIVASA GOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE 560001 REP BY ITS SECRETARY Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4317 WP No. 22806 of 2024 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANDYA DISTRICT MANDYA - 571401 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER PANDAVAPURA SUB-DIVISION PANDAVAPURA MANDYA DITRICT - 571 434 4. THE TAHSILDHAR SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK SRIRANGAPATNA - 571 438 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH K., HCGP) THIS W.P. IS FILED PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO ISSUE SAGUVALI CHIT AFTER COLLECTING THE REQUISITE FEE AND CHARGES AND THEREAFTER EFFECTING MUTATION AND RTC IN RESPECT OF THE LAND MEASURING 2 ACRES IN SY.NO. 411 OF MAHADEVAPURA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK IN FAVOR OF THE PETITIONER UNDER RULE 29 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRANT RULES, 1969 BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 23.11.2023 AS PER ANNX-J. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4317 WP No. 22806 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The petitioner in the captioned petition is seeking direction against fourth respondent - Tahsildar to issue Saguvali Chit after collecting the requisite fee and charges and thereafter effect mutation and enter petitioner's name in the RTC in respect of land measuring 2 acres in Sy.No.411 of Mahadevapura Village, Kasaba Hobli, Srirangapatna Taluk. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned HCGP appearing for the respondents. Perused the records. ,, 3. The petitioner's father had been granted land under the provisions of the grant issued on January 3, 1972, as evidenced by Annexure-C. However, the petitioner’s father has since passed away, and now, the petitioner, as the legal heir, has been tirelessly seeking the issuance of a Saguvali Chit, which was originally intended for the grantee in 1972. Despite multiple requests and representations, the petitioner continues - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4317 WP No. 22806 of 2024 to face delays in securing this critical document from the authorities. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out a glaring issue to this Court: that other grantees, who are similarly situated in terms of the grant, have already been issued the Saguvali Chit in respect of the very same survey number, while the petitioner’s father’s claim has remained unresolved for over five decades. It is deeply concerning that even after this prolonged period, the jurisdictional Tahsildar has shown an alarming lack of sensitivity towards the petitioner’s repeated pleas. This continued inaction further compounds the issue, leaving the petitioner without legal acknowledgment of his entitlement, despite the existence of parallel cases being handled promptly. 5. On behalf of the State, the learned High Court Government Pleader (HCGP) has argued that the Tahsildar would expedite the petitioner's request and ensure that the prayer sought in the representation is processed within one month. The Tahsildar’s primary concern, as pointed out, is to - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4317 WP No. 22806 of 2024 verify that the land granted to the petitioner does not overlap with forest land. 6. This Court, given the existence of other grantees who have received their Saguvali Chits, the petitioner, being the legitimate son and heir to the grantee, should not face any further delays. Any indefinite deferral in this matter would constitute discrimination, violating the principles laid down in Article 14 of the Constitution of India, which guarantees equality before the law. 7. However, the petitioner's counsel has produced Annexure-A, which clearly contradicts the stance taken by the Tahsildar, as it demonstrates that the petitioner’s land is not part of any forest area. This document, along with the fact that similarly placed grantees have already been issued their respective Saguvali Chits, highlights the clear discrimination in the handling of the petitioner’s case. The prolonged inaction by the Tahsildar, spanning almost fifty-two years, points to a severe failure in fulfilling the duties of the public office. Such inaction cannot be condoned, as it undermines the petitioner’s - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:4317 WP No. 22806 of 2024 legitimate rights. This is a fit case for the issuance of a writ of mandamus, compelling the concerned Authorities to act promptly. 8. For the foregoing reasons, this Court passes the following: ORDER i) The writ petition is hereby allowed; ii) Respondent No.4 – the Tahsildar, is directed to immediately verify the records, specifically reviewing Annexure-A (RTC), and take note of the relevant details therein; and iii) Respondent No.4 is further directed to consider the petitioner’s representation forthwith, expedite the necessary inquiry, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE KG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17