- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:1637 WP No. 34273 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 34273 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. R. MANJUNATH, S/O LATE RAMAKRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT GARUDACHAR PALYA, K R PURAM HOBLI, WHITEFIELD ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 048, GPA HOLDER OF SRI. N.R. VENKATESH, S/O RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. VANDANA N, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, BEHIND KANDAYA BHAVANA, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009. 3. THE COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF SURVEY SETTLEMENTS AND LAND RECORDS, Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:1637 WP No. 34273 of 2024 K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 001. 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU NORTH SUB DIVISION, KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009. 5. TAHSILDAR, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 036. 6. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009. 7. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, BENGALURU EAST TALUK OFFICE, K.R. PURA, BENGALURU - 560 036. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO EFFECT KHATHA/COMPETERIZED RTC IN THE NAME OF THE ORIGINAL GRANTEE AND CONDUCT PODI AND DURASTH IN RESPECT OF 1 ACRE OF SY.NO. 120, SITUATED AT NAGONDAHALLI VILLAGE K.R. PURA HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK CONSIDERING THE PETITIONERS REPRESENTATIONS DATED 28/11/2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:1637 WP No. 34273 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned petition is filed seeking mandamus against the respondents to generate computerized RTC to an extent of 1 acre in Sy.No.120 based on the grant order and accordingly, conduct phodi and durasti. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court by invoking its writ jurisdiction, contending that respondent No.5, the Tahsildar, has remained completely inactive and has failed to consider or act upon the petitioner’s representation dated 28.11.2024. The petitioner asserts his lawful title over an extent of one acre of land, claiming that the said land was granted in his favor pursuant to LND SR 13/1994-95, dated 24.09.1994. To substantiate the legitimacy and validity of the grant, the petitioner has placed reliance on an official memorandum issued by the competent authority, which was subsequently followed by the issuance of a saguvali chit in his name. Furthermore, the petitioner has produced a copy of the official - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:1637 WP No. 34273 of 2024 memorandum along with the relevant sketch dated 24.09.1994, which evidences the demarcation of the granted land and supports his claim over the said property. 3. Learned Additional Government Advocate (AGA), appearing on behalf of the respondents, has opposed the petitioner’s claim, primarily contending that the subject land in Survey No. 120 is classified as gundu topu and therefore, the alleged grant in favor of the petitioner is not genuine. The respondents have sought to cast doubt over the legitimacy of the grant by asserting that government land classified as gundu topu is not meant for individual allotment and that the petitioner’s claim lacks merit. 4. In response, the learned counsel for the petitioner has effectively countered the submissions made by the learned AGA by placing reliance on a previous order passed by a coordinate bench of this Court. The petitioner’s counsel has drawn the attention of this Court - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:1637 WP No. 34273 of 2024 to similar cases wherein other grantees, who were allotted land in the very same Survey No. 120, had approached the coordinate bench with grievances identical to that of the present petitioner. In those cases, this Court had issued directions in favor of such similarly placed grantees, thereby recognizing the legitimacy of their claims. The petitioner contends that his case stands on the same footing as those grantees, and therefore, the benefit of the directions issued by the coordinate bench ought to be extended to him as well. 5. Upon a careful consideration of the submissions made by both sides and having taken cognizance of the order passed by the coordinate bench in favor of similarly placed individuals, this Court is of the view that the present case warrants the issuance of a writ of mandamus. Despite the petitioner having submitted a representation well in advance on 28.11.2024, respondent No.5, the Tahsildar, has exhibited complete inaction and laxity in dealing with the matter. The lack of any response - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:1637 WP No. 34273 of 2024 or appropriate action by respondent No.5 indicates an unjustified delay in the decision-making process, thereby necessitating the intervention of this Court. In view of the circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to direct respondent No.5 to consider and pass appropriate orders on the petitioner’s representation in accordance with the law, within a stipulated timeframe. 6. For the foregoing reasons, this Court passes the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed; ii. Respondent No.5-Tahsildar, is hereby directed to consider the representation dated 28.11.2024 evidenced at Annexure-A and pass appropriate orders and take proper steps to issue computerized RTC followed by phodi and durasti so as to demarcate the petitioner's land in Sy.No.120; - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:1637 WP No. 34273 of 2024 iii. This exercise shall be accomplished within a period of six months from the date of receipt of order copy. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24 CT: BHK