- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2567 WP No. 29630 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 29630 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. KEMPAMMA, W/O LATE RAMAIAH, D/O LATE GIRIAPPA, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, R/AT LAKSHMIPURA VILLAGE, DASANPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU-562 123. …PETITIONER (BY SRI P.M SIDDAMALLAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF LAND REVENUE, M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, KANDAYA BHAVANA, K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560 009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K MANJUNATH, HCGP) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 8.7.2022 AS PER ANNEXURE-C BY ISSUING A WRIT OF MANDAMUS. Digitally signed by NANDINI R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2567 WP No. 29630 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER Petitioner in the captioned petition is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of respondent No.2 - Tahsildar in not acting upon the representation submitted by the petitioner. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondent-State. Perused the records. 3. Facts leading to the case are as under: The petition pertains to an agricultural land bearing Sy.No.24, situated at Lakshmipura Village, Dasanapura Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, which was previously part of Nelamangala Taluk. The total extent of the land in question measures 1 Acre 20 Guntas. The petitioner is asserting ownership and title to this land based on the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2567 WP No. 29630 of 2024 recommendation of the Grant Committee, which had decided to regularize the petitioner’s unauthorized possession. Subsequently, a grant certificate was issued on 04.09.1978, followed by the issuance of a “Saguvali Chit” by the competent authorities. These developments are evidenced through Annexure-B, which has been produced by the petitioner. 4. The petitioner’s grievance stems from the unilateral deletion of her name from the Record of Rights, Tenancy, and Crops (RTC) in 2003. Aggrieved by this action, the petitioner submitted a representation/application requesting the restoration of her name in the RTC on the basis of the grant certificate. It appears that there were lapses on the part of the second respondent-Tahsildar in addressing the petitioner’s application and taking necessary action. Despite the petitioner’s submission of relevant documents, including the grant certificate, there has been inaction on the part of the authorities. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2567 WP No. 29630 of 2024 5. The learned High Court Government Pleader (HCGP), opposing the writ petition, contends that the grant itself appears to be doubtful. The HCGP argues that there is a lack of supporting documentation to establish that the Grant Committee had made a valid recommendation in favor of the petitioner. This position is used to resist the petitioner’s claims and challenge the authenticity of the grant. 6. Upon meticulous review of the writ papers, it becomes evident that the petitioner has been able to produce a Xerox copy of the grant certificate, which is annexed as Annexure-B. This document substantiates the petitioner’s assertion regarding the issuance of the grant certificate. In light of this, the second respondent- Tahsildar is obligated to secure the original records pertaining to Sy.No.24 and initiate an inquiry based on the petitioner’s application. The lapses in conducting such an inquiry earlier amount to administrative inaction, which necessitates judicial intervention. Therefore, this matter - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2567 WP No. 29630 of 2024 qualifies as a fit case for the issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the authorities to take appropriate action in accordance with the law. 7. For the foregoing reasons, this Court passes the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed; ii. Respondent No.2-Tahsildar, to take cognizance of the true copy of the grant certificate furnished along with the application. The Tahsildar shall also ensure by securing original records that the grant is genuine. In the event the Tahsildar is satisfied that the petitioner was granted the land in question, further course of action shall be adopted and appropriate orders shall be passed by the Tahsildar in accordance with law; - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:2567 WP No. 29630 of 2024 iii. This exercise shall be accomplished within a period of four months from the date of receipt of order copy. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8