- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2170 WP No. 36523 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.36523 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: DEVARAJU S/O K T LAKKEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/O KADAHEMMIGE VILLAGE KIKKERI HOBLI, K R PETE TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571423 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SYED AKBAR PASHA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDAH BENGALURU 560 001. 2. TEH ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER K R PETE TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT - 571432. 3. THE TAHSILDAR K R PETE TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT - 571432. …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2170 WP No. 36523 of 2024 (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA ) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TAHSILDAR TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER ON 13.03.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE -D TO CONDUCT PHODI AND DURUSTHI OF PETITIONERS LAND SY NO. 136/3 SITUATED AT KADAHEMMIGE VILLAGE, KIKKERI HOBLI, K.R. PETE TALUK, MANDYA DIST. WITHIN REASONABLE TIME. 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 In the captioned writ petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by inaction on the part of respondent No.3 - Tahasildar in not considering the representation dated 13.03.2024 tendered by the petitioner requesting to conduct phodi and durasti in respect of the petition land bearing Sy. No.136/3 measuring to an extent of 4 guntas situated at Kadahemmige Village, Kikkeri Hobli, K.R.Pete Taluk, Mandy District. 2. The learned Additional Government Advocate (AGA), while advancing arguments, submits that a complaint has been lodged before the Karnataka - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2170 WP No. 36523 of 2024 Lokayukta by one of the grantees whose grant in the same survey number has been cancelled. On this premise, she contends that the petitioner’s request for conducting phodi and durasti cannot be considered until the complaint is adjudicated and disposed of by the Karnataka Lokayukta. The learned AGA argues that the pendency of the complaint serves as a legal impediment for processing the petitioner’s request. 3. However, the submission made by the learned AGA is untenable and cannot be accepted. The contention that the pendency of a complaint concerning other grantees prevents the Authorities from considering the petitioner’s request is misconceived. The petitioner’s case stands on an independent footing, and the existence of a complaint regarding similarly placed grantees does not provide sufficient grounds to withhold or delay the petitioner’s legitimate request for phodi and durasti. 4. The learned AGA, during the course of her submissions, has herself acknowledged that the competent Authorities, upon receipt of the petitioner’s - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2170 WP No. 36523 of 2024 application requesting phodi and durasti, have conducted a thorough verification of the records. Based on this meticulous scrutiny, it has been conclusively established that the grant obtained by the petitioner’s father is valid and genuine. The mere fact that grants in favor of other individuals in the same survey number have been cancelled and are the subject matter of a complaint before the Karnataka Lokayukta cannot serve as a legitimate barrier to processing the petitioner’s request. Once the genuineness of the petitioner’s grant has been verified and confirmed, the Authorities are duty-bound to proceed with the petitioner’s application in accordance with law. It is neither reasonable nor lawful to withhold the conduct of phodi and durasti on account of issues unrelated to the petitioner’s specific case. 5. It is a settled legal position that once the grant obtained by the petitioner’s father has been held valid and genuine, the petitioner acquires a corresponding legal right to seek phodi and durasti in respect of the granted land. The respondent Authorities, having confirmed the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2170 WP No. 36523 of 2024 validity of the grant, are under a statutory and legal obligation to act upon the petitioner’s application and process the request without unwarranted delay. The petitioner’s entitlement to seek phodi and durasti flows directly from the recognition of his father’s grant as genuine. In such circumstances, there exists no justifiable reason to deny or delay the petitioner’s application. This case warrants the issuance of a writ of mandamus, compelling the respondents to undertake and complete the process of phodi and durasti in accordance with law and within a reasonable timeframe. 6. With these above observations, this Court proceeds to pass the following; ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are hereby directed to forthwith consider the petitioner’s application and shall forthwith recommend for phodi and durasti to the jurisdictional Assistant Director of Land Records. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:2170 WP No. 36523 of 2024 (iii) This exercise shall be accomplished within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of order copy. (iv) The jurisdictional Assistant Director of Land Records on receipt of papers from respondent Nos.2 and 3 shall thereafter proceed to conduct phodi and durasti. (v) This exercise shall be accomplished within a period of three months from the date of receipt of papers from respondent Nos.2 and 3. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28