- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20679 WP No. 32532 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.32532 OF 2024 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MR. SUNIL BHATIA S/O LATE M.M. BHATIA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS HAVING ITS ADDRESS AT NO.4406/7/8 HIGH POINT 4, NO.45, PALACE ROAD BANGALORE GPO BANGALORE-560 001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI AJAY J.N., ADVOCATE FOR SRI YASHODHAR HEGDE., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. 2. MEENUKUNTE GRAMA PANCHAYATH A RURAL LOCAL BODY OF THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA DODDAJALA POST, JALA HOBLI YELAHANKA TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT-562 157 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. THE TAHSILDAR MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA NES OFFICE ROAD, SUGGAPPA LAYOUT EAST COLONY, YELAHANKA, BENGALURU KARNATAKA-560 064. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R.1; SMT. SPOORTHY V., HCGP FOR R.2.) Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20679 WP No. 32532 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 06.09.2024 BEARING NO.MI.GRA.PAN.77/2024-25 (ANNEXURE-A) ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 31.07.2024 (ANNEXURE-G) SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: A) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the endorsement dated 06/09/2024 bearing No.Mi.Gra.Pan.77/2024-25 (Annexure-A) issued by the respondent; B) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider the representation dated 31/07/2024 (Annexure-G) submitted by the petitioner and include the schedule property in the Assessment List and enter the same in Demand register in Form-11A of the Gram Panchayath and issue E-Katha in the name of the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20679 WP No. 32532 of 2024 petitioner with respect to the schedule property within 45 days. B1) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the Tahsildar of Yelahanka, to process and issue the E- Khata for the schedule property forthwith and to update the revenue records in accordance with the judgment passed in W.P.No.20830/2019, ensuring that the RTC for the period 2024-25 is issued in the name of the petitioner without further delay. C) Grant any such other relief(s) as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interests of justice and equity. 2. The subject matter of the captioned petition is a converted land which was originally granted to one Rajagopal and others. Petitioner purchased the schedule property vide registered sale deed dated 23.10.1991 from the erstwhile owner for a sale consideration of Rs.2,00,000/-. Petitioner thereafter got the property converted into non-agricultural residential purpose vide Order bearing No.BDS.ALN.SR(NA)48/92-93 dated 06.01.2005. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20679 WP No. 32532 of 2024 3. The legal heirs of the original grantee, after a lapse of more than ten years from the date of alienation, initiated proceedings under Section 5 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the PTCL Act), seeking restoration of the land on the ground that the alienation was in contravention of the provisions of the said Act. The Assistant Commissioner, having entertained the said application, proceeded to allow the same and passed an order for resumption of the schedule property in favour of the legal heirs of the original grantee. The said order was later affirmed by the Deputy Commissioner in appeal. Aggrieved by the concurrent findings of the Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner, the petitioner herein approached this Court by filing W.P.No.20830/2019, challenging the legality and correctness of the resumption proceedings initiated under the PTCL Act. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20679 WP No. 32532 of 2024 4. This Court, by a reasoned order dated 24.11.2021, allowed the writ petition and set aside the orders passed by both the Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner. It was categorically held that the application filed by the legal heirs of the original grantee was not maintainable, having been filed beyond the period prescribed under the PTCL Act, and that the petitioner, who had derived title through a registered sale deed, had acquired valid ownership rights. The said order dated 24.11.2021 passed in W.P.No.20830/2019 has attained finality, there being no challenge laid against the same by the respondents. 5. In view of having succeeded before this Court, the petitioner thereafter submitted a representation to the jurisdictional authorities seeking necessary consequential reliefs. The petitioner requested that his name be restored in the revenue records, particularly in the Record of Rights, Tenancy and Crops (RTC) pertaining to the schedule property. He also submitted a request to the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20679 WP No. 32532 of 2024 local Gram Panchayat for issuance of e-Katha, which is an essential record for establishing property ownership in rural areas. However, despite the authoritative pronouncement of this Court and the finality attached to the order in W.P.No.20830/2019, the petitioner has been subjected to prolonged delay and inaction on the part of the revenue authorities. 6. The present case highlights the complete indifference and administrative apathy on the part of respondent No.2 – the jurisdictional Tahsildar. Although this Court had categorically quashed the resumption order and restored the petitioner’s title to the property by its order dated 24.11.2021, respondent No.2 has failed to take necessary steps to give effect to the said order. The petitioner, whose name stood in the RTC prior to the resumption proceedings initiated under Sections 4 and 5 of the PTCL Act, is now being forced to repeatedly approach different authorities merely to have his pre-existing entries restored. The inaction of the Tahsildar, despite there - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20679 WP No. 32532 of 2024 being a binding judicial order in favour of the petitioner, is not only unjustified but also contrary to the basic tenets of rule of law. In the absence of any legal impediment, and considering that the petitioner’s title flows from a valid registered sale deed, the Tahsildar is duty-bound to restore the petitioner’s name to the RTC in compliance with this Court’s earlier order. 7. It is also pertinent to note that under the prevailing online system for issuance of e-Katha by the local Gram Panchayats, the name of the applicant must necessarily reflect in the RTC. The petitioner is thus unable to obtain an e-Katha solely due to respondent No.2’s failure to act upon the Court’s order. This technical requirement renders it impossible for the petitioner to exercise his rights as an owner, despite having succeeded in litigation and holding a registered title to the property. In these circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to seek a writ of mandamus compelling the respondents to give effect to the order passed by this Court. The petitioner - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20679 WP No. 32532 of 2024 has a clear legal right to restoration of his name in the RTC pertaining to Sy.No.67, and the respondents, in turn, have a corresponding legal duty to ensure compliance. Consequently, both respondent No.2 – Tahsildar and respondent No.1 – the concerned Gram Panchayat, are jointly obligated to update the revenue records and issue an e-Katha in favour of the petitioner in a time-bound manner. 8. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) Writ petition is hereby allowed; (ii) Respondent No.2– Tahsildar is directed to forthwith take cognizance of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.20830/2019, and to restore the petitioner’s name in the revenue records pertaining to the schedule property; (iii) The aforesaid exercise of restoring the petitioner’s name in the RTC shall be completed - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20679 WP No. 32532 of 2024 by respondent No.2 within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order; (iv) Upon such restoration in the revenue records, respondent No.1 – Gram Panchayat shall issue the e-Katha in favour of the petitioner without any further delay. (v) The issuance of e-Katha by respondent No.1 shall be carried out within a period of two weeks from the date on which the mutation entry is effected in favour of the petitioner. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43