- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:6343 WP No. 33299 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 33299 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SRI V CHITTIBABU, S/O V.VARADARAJULU NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT NO.18, B.K.COMPLEX, 21ST MAIN ROAD, B.S.K 2ND STAGE, BDA COMPLEX, BNEGALURU - 560 070. …PETITIONER (BY SRI.SHARATH S.GOWDA., ADVOCATE FOR SRI.GANESHA P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDINGS, BENGALURU - 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, KANDAYA BHAVANA, DC OFFICE, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU SOUTH SUB-DIVISION, Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6343 WP No. 33299 of 2024 DC OFFICE, KANDAYA BHAVANA, K.G ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009. 4. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, KANDAYA BHAVANA, K.G ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.B.P.RADHA., AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO EFFECT KHATA IN THE NAME OF PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF LAND MEASURING 4 ACRES IN SY.NO.7 SITUATED AT HOSAKEREHALLI VILLAGE, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION DTD 25.09.24 , VIDE ANNEXURE-M 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 present case highlights a deeply concerning state of affairs. The petitioner has lawfully acquired title to the petition land through a registered sale deed executed on 20.03.2024. The petitioner’s right and title stem from a valid transaction with his erstwhile vendors, whose original grant was subjected to an enquiry and was found to be genuine. Despite the petitioner possessing a legally - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6343 WP No. 33299 of 2024 registered document that establishes his ownership, respondent No.4 – the Tahsildar has exhibited a complete lack of diligence and has failed to fulfill his statutory duty. Sections 128 and 129 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, impose an obligation on the jurisdictional Tahsildar to promptly update the Record of Rights, to reflect changes in ownership as indicated in a registered conveyance deed. However, respondent No.4 has failed to act in accordance with these statutory requirements, thereby causing unnecessary hardship to the petitioner. 2. Taking note of the inaction on the part of respondent No.4 – the Tahsildar who has unjustifiably delayed acting on a duly registered sale deed, this Court directed the learned Additional Government Advocate (AGA) to summon him. In an apparent attempt to cover up his inaction, respondent No.3 – the Tahsildar issued a communication dated 10.02.2025 to the Sub-Registrar, requesting the furnishing of the J-form. Relying on this communication, respondent No.4 has attempted to justify his failure to act on the petitioner’s representation and the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:6343 WP No. 33299 of 2024 registered sale deed submitted along with it. Such conduct reflects a consistent pattern of harassment by revenue officials, who fail to discharge their duties despite clear legal mandates. The petitioner’s sale deed, dated 20.03.2024 and registered on 12.06.2024, was duly submitted along with a representation requesting the mutation of khata. This representation was officially received by the office of respondent No.4 – the Tahsildar on 25.09.2024. However, no action has been taken to effect the necessary changes, demonstrating a deliberate disregard for the petitioner’s rights and the statutory obligations under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. 3. It is pertinent to note that while at the Secretariat level, the Government has undertaken serious initiatives to bring about radical changes in the revenue administration system, including simplifying the procedure for effecting khata transfers based on registered documents, the ground reality remains starkly different. Several notifications have been issued with the objective of streamlining the process and ensuring that genuine land - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:6343 WP No. 33299 of 2024 transactions reflected in registered sale deeds are promptly recorded in the revenue records. However, despite these well-intended policy decisions, the implementation at the grassroots level has been utterly ineffective. Revenue officials, particularly Tahsildars, continue to display an alarming reluctance to act upon registered sale deeds in a timely manner, thereby causing unnecessary hardship and harassment to law-abiding citizens. This case is a prime example of such administrative apathy, where respondent No.4 - Tahsildar has failed to discharge his statutory duty under Sections 128 and 129 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, despite the petitioner fulfilling all legal requirements. The refusal or delay in effecting the mutation of khata based on a duly registered sale deed is not only unjustified but also indicative of an insensitive and arbitrary exercise of power by the revenue authorities. 4. Given the clear inaction and deliberate delay by respondent No.4 - Tahsildar in complying with his mandatory obligations under the law, this Court finds it - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:6343 WP No. 33299 of 2024 necessary to issue a writ of mandamus directing the immediate mutation of the khata in favor of the petitioner. The actions of respondent No.4 - Tahsildar amount to a gross dereliction of duty, and such conduct cannot be condoned. Therefore, in addition to the issuance of mandamus, this Court deems it appropriate to impose a cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) on respondent No.4 - Tahsildar. This amount shall be paid by respondent No.4 during the course of the day as a measure of accountability and as a deterrent against any further instances of unwarranted delay in discharging official duties. 5. This Court further directs that a copy of this order be communicated to the higher authorities in the revenue department so that appropriate measures may be taken to ensure strict adherence to the legal mandates governing khata transfers, thereby preventing further harassment of citizens seeking legitimate relief. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:6343 WP No. 33299 of 2024 6. For the forgoing reasons this Court passed the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. ii. Respondent No.4 – Tahsildar is directed to immediately effect the mutation of khata in favor of the petitioner, based on the registered sale deed produced as evidenced in Annexure-L. iii. The entire process shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. iv. Respondent No.4 – Tahsildar shall pay a cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the Karnataka Advocates Clerks’ Benevolent Trust Fund. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE KVR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13