- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2305 WP No. 28202 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 28202 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR S, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O SRI.SRINIVASACHARI, RESIDING AT: NO.119, BASAVASREE GANESH MANDIR ROAD, TYAGARAJANAGAR, BSK 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 070. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NAGESH S.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU SOUTH SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, KANDAYA BHAVAN, K G ROAD, BENGALURU -560 009. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL. BENAGALURU - 562 106. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.MANJUNATHA K.,HCGP) Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2305 WP No. 28202 of 2024 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE R-3 TO TAKE TIMELY ACTION ON THE APPLICATION DTD.09.07.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNX-A. DIRECTING THE R-2 TO TAKE TIMELY ACTION ON THE APPLICATION DTD.09.07.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNX-B 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 Petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of respondent No.3 - Tahsildar in not considering the representation tendered as per Annexure-A and representation submitted to Assistant Commissioner as per Annexure-B. 2. The petitioner in the captioned writ petition asserts that the land in question, measuring 4 acres, was granted to her under an Official Memorandum dated 06.11.1968. This grant was subsequently formalized through the issuance of a Grant Certificate, as evidenced - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2305 WP No. 28202 of 2024 by the order dated 06.10.1969. According to the petitioner, her name was duly entered into the records in accordance with the grant order and Grant Certificate, and her name was also reflected in the mutation register, as recorded in MR.No.5/1989-90. However, following the introduction of the computerization of Record of Rights, Tenancy, and Crops (RTC), the petitioner alleges that her name was unilaterally deleted from the RTC without any notice or justification. The petitioner contends that the respondent authorities have failed to take any action to restore her name in the RTC, despite the existence of the aforementioned documents, which establish her legal entitlement to the said land. The petitioner submits that this inaction on the part of the respondent authorities is arbitrary and violative of her rights. 3. The Learned High Court Government Pleader, appearing on behalf of the respondents, submits on instructions that the petitioner has not submitted any formal representation to the office of the Tahsildar. It is - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2305 WP No. 28202 of 2024 further submitted that, despite verifying the available records, the office of the Tahsildar has not received any communication or representation from the petitioner seeking restoration of her name in the RTC. 4. In light of the applications submitted by the petitioner, marked as Annexure-A and Annexure-B, this Court deems it appropriate to consider this writ petition as representations submitted by the petitioner to the respondent authorities. The 3rd respondent, Tahsildar, is directed to examine the Official Memorandum dated 06.11.1968, under which the petitioner was granted 4 acres of land, as well as the Grant Certificate issued under the order dated 06.10.1969. These documents, which are placed on record as Annexures-C and D respectively, serve as conclusive evidence of the petitioner's entitlement to the land. Furthermore, the Tahsildar shall also take into account the mutation order recorded in MR.No.5/1989-90, wherein the petitioner's name was duly entered into the RTC based on the Grant Certificate. Despite the presence - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2305 WP No. 28202 of 2024 of these documents, which unequivocally substantiate the petitioner’s claim, the respondents have not produced any contrary evidence to challenge the authenticity of these records or to refute the petitioner’s claim. 5. Upon a careful examination of the records and submissions, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner possesses a legal right to seek the restoration of her name in the RTC, as it was duly reflected in the records prior to its unilateral deletion during the computerization process. The 3rd respondent, Tahsildar, is hereby directed to meticulously examine the records, including the Official Memorandum, Grant Certificate, and mutation order, and to take immediate steps to restore the petitioner's name in the RTC. The restoration process shall be completed expeditiously and in accordance with the law, ensuring that the petitioner’s legal rights are upheld without any further delay. 6. For the foregoing reasons, this Court passes the following: - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:2305 WP No. 28202 of 2024 ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed; ii. Respondent No.3-Tahsildar shall treat this writ petition as representation and accordingly examine the Official Memorandum regarding grant of lands to the petitioner followed by a Grant Certificate which is evidenced at Annexure- C and Annexure-D respectively and pass orders in accordance with law. iii. This exercise shall be accomplished within a period of three months from the date of receipt of order copy. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE RR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7