- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25105 WP NO.30565 OF 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.30565 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. BHARATHI W/O MANJUNATH D/O LATE MOHANRAM KONDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT NO.32, MAGADI ROAD, BANAVADI, BANAVADI POST, RAMANAGAR DISTRICT - 562 127. 2. M. LAKSHMI W/O LAKSHMINARAYANACHAR D/O LATE MOHANRAM KONDAIAH AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT NO.224/1, 4TH MAIN, VINAYAKA STICHUWAR, SINGASANDRA, BENGALURU - 560 068. 3. SMT. HARINAKSHI @ SUJATHA W/O T.S. JAYARAM D/O LATE MOHANRAM KONDAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT NO.116, VASANI TEMPLE ROAD THYMAGONDLU, NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU - 562 132. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. H. VENKATESH DODDERI, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25105 WP NO.30565 OF 2024 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, KANDAYA BHAVANA, BENGALURU. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU NORTH, SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU - 560 012. 4. THE TAHASILDAR BENGALURU NORTH, BENGALURU - 560 012. 5. SRI. M. SHANTHARAMU S/O LATE MOHANRAM KONDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT SIDEDAHALLI, YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU - 560 073. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SIDDHARTH BABURAO, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; SRI. T.N. VISWANATHA, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 05TH NOVEMBER, 2024 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO THE PETITIONER TO APPEAR BEFORE HIM ON 13TH NOVEMBER, 2024 TO CONDUCT THE FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN A CONCLUDED ENQUIRY VIDE ANNEXURE-V; AND ETC. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25105 WP NO.30565 OF 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN RESERVED FOR ORDERS, COMING FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, E.S. INDIRESH J., MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH CAV ORDER In this writ petition, petitioners are assailing the Notice dated 05th November, 2024 (Annexure-V) issued by the respondent No.3-Assistant Commissioner, directing the petitioners to appear before the said authority on 13th November, 2024 to conduct further proceedings in the concluded enquiry. 2. Heard Sri. Venkatesha Dodderi, learned counsel appearing for petitioners; Sri. Siddharth Baburao, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 4; and Sri. T.N. Viswanatha, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.5 3. Sri. H. Venkatesha Dodderi, learned counsel appearing for petitioners contended that the impugned notice suffers from infirmity as the matter has been concluded in Case No.RA(BN) 293/2024 on 03rd October, 2024 and therefore, the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25105 WP NO.30565 OF 2024 respondent No.3 became functus officio to reopen the issue afresh. Accordingly, he sought for interference of this Court. 4. In this regard, learned counsel appearing for petitioners refers to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS vs. S.N. GOYAL reported in AIR 2008 SC 2594 and contended that the quasi judicial authority has no jurisdiction to review its own order. 5. Per contra, Sri. T.N. Viswanatha, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.5 contended that, what is sought for in the impugned notice dated 05th November, 2024 (Annexure-V) is, to appear before the respondent No.3 and therefore, there is no impediment for the petitioners to appear before the respondent No.3. 6. Having taken note of the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, the grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition is that, in Case No.RA(BN)293/2024 dated 03rd October, 2024 (Annexure-K), the respondent No.3 has held that the joint Khata be made in the name of the appellants therein along with their brother viz., - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25105 WP NO.30565 OF 2024 Shantharam (respondent No.5 herein). It is to be noted that, though the said order has reached finality in respect of the land in question, I am of the view that the respondent No.3 has become functus officio and the said authority cannot re-hear the concluded proceedings. In that view of the matter, the arguments advanced by learned counsel appearing for petitioners is accepted. Accordingly, I pass the following: O R D E R 1) Writ petition is allowed; 2) Impugned notice dated 05th November, 2024 (Annexure-V) issued by the respondent No.3 is hereby set-aside. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 79