- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:270 WP No. 26251 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 26251 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. RANGAMMA, W/O GANGADHARA M, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, NO.12, 1ST MAIN, SAKAMMA BADAVANE, NANDINI LAYOUT, BANGALORE NORTH, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT - 560 096. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NAGARAJAPPA A, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KHANDAYA BHAVANA, K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, BANGALORE - 560 001. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA) Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:270 WP No. 26251 of 2024 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 29/07/2024 ISSUED BY THE R3 IN NO. ALN(AABA)/CR/28/2021-22 IN SO FAR AS THE BUILDING PREMISES OF THE PETITIONER IN SITE NO. 23 OF THE LAYOUT FORMED IN LANDS IN SY. NO. 7/1 AND 7/5 MEASURING 20 X 30 OF GATTISIDDANAHALLI VILLAGE, DASANAPURA HOBLI, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT MARKED AT ANN-F AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELEIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER This petition is filed questioning the impugned order dated 29.07.2024 issued by respondent No.3-Tahasildar, calling upon the petitioner to hand over the vacate possession on the ground that the petition land is 'B' kharab land and the same is vested with the government. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA admit that the issue on hand is dealt and decided in W.P.No.24467/2024. The petitioner is a subsequent purchaser and is tracing his right through one - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:270 WP No. 26251 of 2024 T.Ravigowda, who is the petitioner in the connected writ petition. 4. It would be useful for this Court to cull out relevant paragraphs and the operation portion passed in W.P.No.24467/2024, which reads as under: "6. Be that as it may, the notification issued by the State Govt. evidenced at Annexure-E would give a quietus to the claim made by the petitioner and respondent-State. As per the notification, list-1 of the annexure annexed to the notification have to be treated as A karab lands. On closure examination of this notification and schedule annexed to the notification, the petition land is admittedly classified as 'Jago jago kallumarati'. If the petition land falls within list-1 of the annexure, which is part of the notification, this Court is of the view that the re-classification done while effecting phodi is liable to be set aside by this Court. The classification of the disputed land as B karab clearly contravenes the Government notification evidenced at Annexure-E. 7. Therefore, the impugned notice issued by respondent no.2 Tahsildar calling upon the petitioner to hand over possession is one without jurisdiction. The notification clearly substantiate the petitioner's claim that the disputed land was rightly classified as A karab land and therefore, re-classification done while effecting phodi was one without preceded by enquiry. In that view of the matter, the impugned notice issued by the Tahsildar is not sustainable and is liable to be set aside by this Court. 8. For the reasons stated supra, the following order is passed : ORDER i) Writ petition is allowed in part; - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:270 WP No. 26251 of 2024 ii) Impugned notice dated 29.07.2024 issued by respondent no.2 as per Annexure-G is quashed and set aside; iii) Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to furnish a copy of the order passed by this Court before respondent no.2, before whom the application filed under Section 122B of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act is pending, on production of the order passed by this Court. iv) The Deputy Commissioner is directed to take notice of the observation made by this Court and shall pass appropriate orders i.e., from the date of receipt of the order copy the Deputy Commissioner shall pass appropriate order within a period of 8 weeks thereon." 5. In the light of findings recorded by this Court in the connected matter relating to the very same petition land, the impugned order dated 29.07.2024 is not sustainable and is liable to be quashed. 6. Accordingly, this Court passes the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed; ii. The impugned order dated 29.07.2024, passed by respondent No.3-Tahasildar, as per Annexure-F, is hereby quashed. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE HDK CT: BHK