- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2303 WP No. 28619 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. 28619 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: KRISHNAPPA, S/O CHIKKAMUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, RESIDING AT SOLUR, VISHWANATHAPURA, BANGALORE RURAL-562 110. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SACHIN B S.,ADVOCATE) AND: THE TAHASILDAR, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, DEVANAHALLI, BANGALORE RURAL-562 110. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT.B P RADHA., AGA) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO ISSUE SAGUVALI CHIT BY ACTING UPON THE RECOMMENDATION MADE BY THE AKRAMA-SAKRAMA COMMITTEE AS PER THE ORDER DTD. 16.12.2003 AS PER ANNX-C AND BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER AS PER ANNX-A. DTD 13.09.2024. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2303 WP No. 28619 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned petition is filed seeking direction against respondent -Tahsildar to issue saguvali chit in terms of the recommendation made by the Akrama- Sakrama Committee vide order dated 16.12.2003 which is evidenced at Annexure-C. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA. 3. The case on hand clearly reflects complete laxness on the part of the Tahsildar in not acting upon the recommendation made by the Committee which is dated 16.12.2003. The committee under Rule 108-D (4) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966 after preliminary enquiry has recommended to regularize the petitioners' unauthorised occupation over the petition land. This order passed by the Committee is dated 16.12.2003. The - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2303 WP No. 28619 of 2024 respondent-Tahsildar who is the Secretary of the Committee is required to issue certificate of grant or issue Saguvali Chit in the prescribed form, subject to payment of premium by the grantee. Since there is lack of diligence on the part of the respondent-Tahsildar for almost 21 years, it is a fit case where the mandamus lies. 4. For the foregoing reasons, this Court passes the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed; ii. Respondent-Tahsildar is forthwith directed to consider the recommendations made by the committee, regularizing petitioners' unauthorized occupancy, which is evidenced at Annexure-C and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, more particularly adhering to the procedure contemplated under Rule 108-D sub-clause (3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966; - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2303 WP No. 28619 of 2024 iii. This exercise shall be accomplished within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of order copy. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE RR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9