- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:9737 WP No. 34899 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 34899 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI UMESH GOWDA S/O LT MUTHAPPA GOWDA GED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT KUNTALJAE HOUSE, AJITH NAGARA KAMALANJA VILLAGE AND POST BELTHANGADI TLAUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT 574228 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVIKUMAR G H., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT REP BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MS BUILDNG, AMBEDKA VEEDHI BENGALURU 560001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANGALURU DAKSHINA KANNAD DISRICT 575001 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISISONER PUTHUR SUB DIVISON, PUTHUR DAKSHINA KANNADA DISRICT574201 4. THE TAHSILDAR BELTHANGADI TALUK DAKSHINA KANNDA DSITRICT 574214 5. SMT SUMA RAI Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:9737 WP No. 34899 of 2024 W/OUMESH RAI AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/T KOABETHADAK HOUSE KUTRUPADI VILLAGE, PUTHURU TALUK DAKSHNA KANNADA DISTRICT 574221 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P.RADHA., AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER D.K.DISTRICT, DATED 14.06.2024, IN CASE NO. RAP. 146/2022 AND THE ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, PUTHUR SUB- DIVISION, PUTHHURU, DATED 02.02.2022 IN CASE NO. ADS R.E.V.S.R. 37/2020-21. VIDE ANNEXURE - A AND B. CONSEQUENTLY CANCEL THE GRANT MADE IN FAVOR OF RESPONDENT NO.5 AS PER THE ORDER DATED 22.03.2018 BEARING NO. H.S.R.S.R.728/2016-17 VIDE ANNEXURE-E, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. A grant of 9 Cents of land was made in favour of respondent No.5 in the year 2018 and this grant was challenged by the petitioner, who is also a beneficiary of a similar grant. This challenge has - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:9737 WP No. 34899 of 2024 been repelled by the Assistant Commissioner and also confirmed with the Deputy Commissioner, as against which, the present petition is filed. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that respondent No.5 has been granted land illegally in as much as she is not a resident of the village. It is also his contention that respondent No.5 has been granted land in one place, but she is trying to put up a construction at a different place adjoining the land of the petitioner. 3. In my view, these two grounds cannot be a factor, which would be relevant for the purpose of examining the validity of grant made in favour of respondent No.5. 4. The Authorities, after examining the matter, have come to the conclusion that, respondent No.5 was entitled for a grant and have granted her 9 Cents of land and, therefore, the petitioner, who does not have a rival claim, cannot have any grievance over - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:9737 WP No. 34899 of 2024 the said grant, more so, when the petitioner himself was the beneficiary of a similar grant. 5. As far as the contention that respondent No.5 is putting up a construction at a place other than the place where she was granted the land, admittedly, the petitioner has already filed a suit against respondent No.5 seeking for injunction and he also states that he has been given an interim order in that suit. 6. In the light of the said assertion, this question need not be addressed in a proceeding relating to a challenge made to a grant. If, respondent No.5 is in fact putting up a construction in a place other than the place that she is granted, obviously, the Authorities would look into the matter and pass appropriate orders, but that cannot be a ground to annul a grant made in her favour. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:9737 WP No. 34899 of 2024 7. Consequently, I find no merit in this writ petition and this writ petition is therefore dismissed. 8. In view of the disposal of the petition, all pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE GSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10