Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 35700 (KAR)

SRI MUNISHAMAPPA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/32171/2024 · 2025-07-08

E S Indiresh

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24712 WP No. 32171 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 32171 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI MUNISHAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, S/O LATE PILLAPPA, R/AT NO.276, NEAR SLN TEMPLE, RACHENAHALLI, DR. SHIVARAM KARANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU NORTH - 560077. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAMESH KUMAR., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPT BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, BENGALURU - 560001. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU 560 001. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK (ADDL), YELAHANKA, BANGALORE-560 064. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SIDDHARTH BABURAO., AGA) Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24712 WP No. 32171 of 2024 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA., PRAYING TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 19.09.24 AS PER ANNX-H TO RECTIFY THE REVENUE ENTRIES BY REMOVING THE NAME OF GOVERNMENT AND ENTER THE NAME OF PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF SY. NO. 50 BLOCK NO. 36, MEASURING 4 ACRES OF MARAKALUNTE VILLAGE, JALA HOBLI, YELAHANKA TALUK, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is with regard to directing the respondents - Authorities to consider the representation dated 19.09.2024 (Annexure-H) to rectify the revenue entries by removing the name of the government. 2. Having taken note of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, no interference is called for in this writ petition to direct the respondent- authoritites, to modify the entries made in the revenue records unless the same is questioned by the petitioner - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24712 WP No. 32171 of 2024 herein in the manner known to law. In that view of the matter, the writ petition does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE bkm