- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:1135 WP No. 31875 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 31875 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: SRI. VENKATARAMA REDDY B.M, S/O. LATE DODDA MUNISWAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/AT BYNAHALLI VILLAGE, MURGAMALLA HOBALI, CHINTAMANI TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT, CHIKKABALLAPURA - 563 125, …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRINATHA B.V, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE TAHSILDAR, CHINTAMANI TALUK OFFICE, MEENI VIDHANA SOUDHA BUILDING, CHINTAMANI, CHINTAMANI - 563 125. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, CHIKKABALLAPURA SUBDIVISION, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT - 562 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:1135 WP No. 31875 of 2024 R-1 AND 2 CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 17.12.2023 HERE WITH 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 ORAL ORDER The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Tahasildar, thereby certifying MR No.5/2005-2006. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though a detailed representation is submitted on 07.12.2023 to rectify the records, it is alleged that there is complete inaction on the part of respondent No.1-Tahasildar. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned mutation, he has a remedy by way of an appeal under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, before respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner. If there is an illegal certification of mutation and the petitioner's name is deleted, the petitioner is required to challenge the said mutation; unless the said mutation is adjudicated in the manner known to law, the petitioner's representation cannot be considered by the revenue - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:1135 WP No. 31875 of 2024 officials. Therefore, this Court deems it fit to reserve liberty to the petitioner to challenge the impugned mutation, which is prima facie passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice. Since the petitioner is not notified before passing the impugned mutation, four weeks time is granted to the petitioner to file an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner. If such an appeal is filed, the Assistant Commissioner, after notifying all interested parties, shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14 CT: BHK