- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4705 WP No. 100450 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 100450 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. HARISH PATIL S/O P. SIDDALINGANAGOUDA, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE, RESIDING AT #39, 1ST FLOOR, 5TH CROSS, VARMA LAY-OUT, DASARAHALLI MAIN ROAD, H.A. FARM POST, BHUVANESHWARI NGAR, BENGALURU-560 057. … PETITIONER (BY SMT. SUNITHA P. KALASOOR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, SHIRUGUPPA, TQ: SHIRUGUPPA, DIST: BALLARI-583 121. 2. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STAMPS, BALLARI DISTRICT, BALLARI-583 101. … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SOUBHAGYA VAKKUND, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. Y.LAKSHMIKANT REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, AGA FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4705 WP No. 100450 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Smt.Sunitha P.Kalasoor., counsel for the petitioner, Smt.Soubhagya Vakkund., counsel on behalf of Sri.Y.Lakshmikant Reddy., for respondent No.1 and Sri. Praveen K.Uppar., AGA for respondent No.2 have appeared in person. 2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: a) A Writ of Certiorari to quash the order dated 01.10.2024 bearing No.NaSaSi/Kam.Vi./KA.Va/2024-25 passed by respondent No.1 vide Annexure-M. b) A Writ of Mandamus directing respondent No.1 to consider the representation dated 27.09.2024 of the petitioner as admitted by respondent No.1 in the order dated 01.10.2024 vide Annexure-M. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4705 WP No. 100450 of 2025 3. The short facts are these: The petitioner contends that Sy.No.297/A was the agricultural land and by the order of conversion in 2001-02, the land was converted to industrial use. One V.Laxman sold the property in question in favor of the petitioner and his family on 22.05.2019 by way of a registered sale deed. On 15.06.2019, an application was made to decide the Stamp Act for the sale of the aforesaid land i.e., Sy.No.297/A. On 22.10.2019 the District Registrar and Deputy Commissioner of Stamps, Ballari passed the order and ordered to pay stamp duty of Rs.6,52,740/- for the registration of the sale deed by V.Laxman to the petitioner’s family. This order included the land along with the 13-year-old building that existed on the same land and tax was also levied on building along with land. On 09.07.2020, the digital Khata (e-Swattu) was created in favor of the petitioner, his brothers and sisters as per the sale deed. It is said that the petitioner’s family entered into a registered partition on 11.07.2023 wherein, two brothers and two sisters of the petitioner have relinquished the property in favor of the petitioner. The petitioner paid the municipality tax. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4705 WP No. 100450 of 2025 As things stood thus, the petitioner moved an application to mutate his name to the scheduled property by removing the names of other co-owners as per the registered partition deed. However, respondent No.1 issued an endorsement stating that to consider his request, he was required to submit a sketch of the shed or the building permission that was given for the construction of the shed. Under these circumstances, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. 5. The facts are sufficiently stated and they do not require reiteration. The issue revolves around a narrow compass and relates to the rejection of the petitioner’s request to mutate his name to the scheduled property by removing the names of co-owners. 6. The petitioner requested the Competent Authority to mutate his name to the scheduled property. Respondent No.1 declined to accord the request of the petitioner solely on the ground that the petitioner was required to furnish the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4705 WP No. 100450 of 2025 sketch of the shed or building permission. Admittedly, the petitioner has paid the requisite tax. There is no objection by anybody. The petitioner has made a simple request to mutate his name. To mutate the name of the petitioner, furnishing the sketch of the shed or building permission is not required. This aspect of the matter has been overlooked by the Competent Authority. The refusal to accord the request is untenable. Hence, this Court deems it appropriate to set aside the order passed by respondent No.1. 7. The Writ of Certiorari is ordered. The order dated 01.10.2024 passed by respondent No.1 bearing No.NaSaSi/Kam.Vi./KA.Va/2024-25 vide Annexure-M is set aside. A Writ of Mandamus is issued directing respondent No.1 to consider the request of the petitioner to mutate his name to the scheduled property, following law within six weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. 8. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is allowed. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE RH LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 74