- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21266 WP NO.34178 OF 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.34178 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: KRISHNAVENI W/O LATE GOPALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, R/AT DA. RA. BENDRE ROAD, NANGLI VILLAGE AND POST, BYRAKUR HOBLI, MULABAGAL TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 131. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S. VISWESWARAIAH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR - 563 101. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER KOLAR SUB-DIVISION, KOLAR - 563 101. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, MULBAGAL TALUK, MULBAGAL - 563 131. Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21266 WP NO.34178 OF 2024 5. SRI. KUPPASWAMY, D/O LATE KANDASWAMY, AGE: MAJOR. 6. SMT. KANNAMMA W/O KUPPUSWAMY, AGE: MAJOR. 7. SRI. N.K .NAGARAJA S/O KUPPUSWAMY, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS. RESPONDENTS 5 TO 7 ARE R/AT NANGLI VILLAGE AND POST, BYRAKUR HOBLI, MULABAGAL TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 131. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; SRI. JEEVAN GOPAL, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. THILAK ITTANGUR, ADVOCATE FOR R5 TO R7) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 DATED 26TH FEBRUARY, 2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND THE ORDER DATED 13TH OCTOBER, 2023 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN CASE NO.R.A.731/2015-16 VIDE ANNEXURE-B; AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21266 WP NO.34178 OF 2024 ORAL ORDER Smt. Navya Shekhar, learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondents 1 to 4 and Sri. Thilak Ittangur, learned counsel accepts notice for respondents 5 to 7. 2. In this petition, the petitioner is challenging the endorsement dated 26th February, 2024 (Annexure-A) issued by the respondent No.2 and order dated 13th October, 2023 (Annexure-B) passed by the respondent No.3 in R.A. No.731/2015-16. 3. Heard Sri. S. Visweswaraiah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Smt. Navya Shekhar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 4; and Sri. Jeevan Gopal, learned counsel on behalf of Sri. Thilak Ittangur, appearing for respondents 5 to 7. 4. Sri. S. Visweswaraiah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has filed R.A.P. No.73/2024 before the respondent No.2, challenging the order dated 13th October, 2024 (Annexure-B) passed by the respondent No.3 in R.A. No.731/2015-16, however, the respondent No.2, without hearing to the parties has issued the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21266 WP NO.34178 OF 2024 impugned endorsement. Accordingly, he sought for interference of this Court. 5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and on perusal of the finding recorded by the respondent No.2 in the endorsement dated 26th February, 2024 (Annexure-A), the same would indicate that the respondent No.2 had issued the impugned endorsement without hearing the parties, so also, the way in which, the endorsement is issued cannot be sustainable under law, since the respondent No.2 has to exercise the quasi judicial power by looking into the grounds urged by the petitioners in the revision petition and to answer the same in the reasons in a manner known to law. In that view of the matter, the cryptic order passed by the respondent No.2 dated 26th February, 2024 (Annexure-A) styled as 'Endorsement' cannot be accepted. Therefore, I find force in the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and accordingly, the matter is required to be remitted back to the respondent No.2 to reconsider the same, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties in accordance with law. In the result, I pass the following: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21266 WP NO.34178 OF 2024 O R D E R 1) Writ Petition is allowed; 2) Endorsement dated 26th February, 2024 (Annexure-A) issued by the respondent No.2 in R.A.P. No.75/2024 is hereby quashed and the matter is remitted back to the respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner to reconsider the same afresh, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties in a manner known to law and take decision as expeditiously as possible. SD/- (E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35