- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3563 WP No. 23327 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.23327 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT.JAYAMMA W/O LATE VENKATAIAH AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS 2. SMT.KEMPAMMA W/O LATE CHIKKANNA @ CHIKKONU AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 3. SRI. PAPANNA S/O LATE VENKATAIAH AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS 4. SMT.SAROJAMMA W/O LATE KENGALLAIAH AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS 5. SMT.BHAGYAMMA W/O LATE NEELAIAH AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS 6. SMT.VENKATAMMA D/O LATE VENKATAIAH W/O NARAYANAIAH AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS SL. NOS.1 TO 6 ALL ARE R/AT ABBURU VILLAGE AND POST Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3563 WP No. 23327 of 2024 KASABA HOBLI, CHANNAPATTANA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562 108 7. SMT.LAKSHMAMMA D/O LATE VENKATAIAH W/O LATE KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/AT VALAGERE VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571 428 8. SMT.LAKSHMAMMA D/O. LATE VENKATAIAH W/O DODDATHAMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/AT KESTHUR VILLAGE AATHAGURU HOBLI MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTIRCT-571 429 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. M.PRABHAKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S.BUILDINGS DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER RAMANAGARA SUB-DIVISION MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA B.M. ROAD, RAMANAGARA TOWN RAMANAGARA - 562 159 - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3563 WP No. 23327 of 2024 3. THE TAHSILDAR CHANNAPATTANA TALUK TALUK OFFICE COMPOUND CHANNAPATTANA TOWN CHANNAPATTANA -562 160 4. THE DEPUTY TAHASILDAR CHANNAPATTANA TALUK TALUK OFFICE COMPOUND CHANNAPATTANA TOWN CHANNAPATTANA-562 160 5. REVENUE INSPECTOR KASABA HOBLI CHANNAPATTANA TALUK TALUK OFFICE COMPOUND CHANNAPATTANA TOWN CHANNAPATTANA -562160 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.B.P.RADHA, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO TRANSFER THE KHATHA IN THE JOINT NAMES OF THE PETITIONERS IN RESPECT OF THE LAND MEASURING 3 ACRES 4 GUNTAS IN SY.NO.255 (NEW SY.NO.255/1) OF ABBUR VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK BY CONSIDERING THE PETITIONERS REPRESENTATION/ APPLICATION DTD 26.10.2021 AT ANNX-A 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 - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:3563 WP No. 23327 of 2024 ORAL ORDER The captioned writ petition is filed assailing the endorsement dated 12.06.2023 bearing No.RRT/CR/315/ 2022-23 issued by respondent No.3 – Tahasildar vide Annexure-B. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AGA. Perused the writ papers. 3. The subject matter of the petition is an agricultural land bearing Sy. No.255 of Abbur Village totally measuring 5 acres 35 guntas and Sy. No.371 measuring 4 acres 6 guntas. The petitioners herein represent the branch of Venkataiah. The petitioners assert that petition land is an Inam land and their ancestor namely Thimmaiah sought for re-grant. The Special Deputy Commissioner for Inams Abolition, while entertaining an application tendered by Thimmaiah, ordered to jointly register the names of Thimmaiah and Venkataiah as Joint Occupants and premium was collected, - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:3563 WP No. 23327 of 2024 which is evidenced at Annexure-C. The records also reveal that there is no dispute between Thimmaiah Branch and Venkataiah Branch. The records also reveal that the names of Thimmaiah's legal heirs were mutated to an extent of ½ share and they meddled with the property by selling the same. 4. Upon a detailed examination of the impugned endorsement dated 12.06.2023, as evidenced in Annexure-B, it becomes evident that Respondent No.3, the Tahasildar, has failed to appropriately consider the underlying issue. The lands in question are Inam lands, and the grant of these lands was made jointly to Thimmaiah and Venkataiah. This fact is clearly reflected in the revenue records, specifically in Register No.VIII, where the name of Venkataiah is also recorded, thereby confirming that Venkataiah, the son of Bommaiah, was an original holder of the agricultural lands bearing Sy. No.255 and Sy. No.371. Furthermore, the order passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner for Inams Abolition, dated - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:3563 WP No. 23327 of 2024 01.05.1963, as evidenced in Annexure-D, confirms that the lands were granted jointly to both Thimmaiah and Venkataiah. Therefore, the Tahasildar, Respondent No.3, should have acknowledged this historical and legal context when reviewing the petitioners’ application. 5. The records clearly show that, while Thimmaiah’s name was mutated in the revenue records (RTC), acknowledging his half share in the lands, the petitioners’ legitimate claim to have their names mutated in accordance with the same grant order has been unjustly overlooked by the authorities. The impugned endorsement at Annexure-B fails to provide any substantial or clear rationale as to why the petitioners' request for mutation of their names was declined, despite the fact that there is no dispute regarding the lands being Inam lands or that Venkataiah, as one of the original grantees, holds legal rights to the lands. The Tahasildar's failure to clarify why the name mutation was not executed undermines the - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:3563 WP No. 23327 of 2024 petitioners' rightful claim and perpetuates a glaring legal discrepancy that ought to be rectified. 6. What is even more striking is that in the impugned endorsement, Respondent No.3, the Tahasildar, has noted that the lands should be restored to the names of the "original kathedars." This statement is particularly concerning because the petitioners, as the legal heirs of Venkataiah, are the rightful successors to the original kathedars. Therefore, the statement in the endorsement, suggesting the need for restoration to the original kathedars, is inaccurate and misplaced. The petitioners, being the legal heirs of Venkataiah, are the rightful holders of the land, and the assertion in the endorsement that the lands should be restored to the "original kathedars" fails to recognize the petitioners’ legal entitlement to the property. This misconception further undermines the legitimacy of the impugned endorsement and highlights its inadequacy in addressing the actual facts of the case. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:3563 WP No. 23327 of 2024 7. Given these considerations, it is abundantly clear that the impugned endorsement issued by Respondent No.3 is both legally flawed and factually inaccurate. The endorsement’s failure to properly acknowledge the petitioners' right to mutation of their names in the revenue records, despite the clear evidence of their entitlement, renders it unsustainable. The petitioners, as the legal heirs of Venkataiah, are entitled to have their names reflected in the revenue records in accordance with the joint grant that was made to both Thimmaiah and Venkataiah. The impugned endorsement, dated 12.06.2023, must therefore be set aside, as it fails to recognize the petitioners' rightful claim to the lands, overlooks the legal framework governing Inam lands, and presents an erroneous interpretation of the original kathedars’ rights. 8. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following; ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:3563 WP No. 23327 of 2024 (ii) The impugned endorsement dated 12.06.2023 bearing No.RRT/CR/315/ 2022-23, as evidenced in Annexure-B, is hereby set aside. (iii) Respondent No.3 – Tahasildar is directed to take cognizance of the grant order, evidenced in Annexure-D, along with Register No.VIII, as evidenced in Annexure-E, and shall promptly mutate the petitioners' names in the revenue records after verifying the relevant documents, in accordance with applicable law. (iv) Respondent No.3 – Tahasildar shall take note that the remaining extent of land in Sy. No.255, excluding Thimmappa’s portion, has been re-assigned as Sy. No.255/1. Respondent No.3 - Tahasildar shall take cognizance of this re-assignment, with respect to the portion held by Venkataiah, and shall ensure that the legal heirs’ names are - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:3563 WP No. 23327 of 2024 duly mutated after proper verification. (v) The above exercise shall be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12