- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43120 WP No. 27767 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 27767 OF 2015 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. 1(A) 1(B) 1(C) 1(D) 1(E) 1(F) SHRI RAMA SHETTIGARA S/O LATE DEVAPPA SHETTIGARA SINCE DEAD BY LRS SMT. PREMA SHETTIGARTHI WIFE OF RAMA SHETTIGARA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS SRI. SURESH SHETTIGAR S/O RAMA SHETTIGARA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS SRI. SUDHAKAR SHETTIGAR S/O RAMA SHETTIGAR AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS SUNADHA SHETTIGARTHI AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS D/O RAMA SHETTIGAR SUJATHA SHETTIGARTHI AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS D/O RAMA SHETTIGAR SRI. PRAKASH SHETTIGAR S/O RAMA SHETTIGAR AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43120 WP No. 27767 of 2015 1(G) 1(H) 1(I) 1(J) 1(K) VANITHA SHETTIGARTHI AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS D/O RAMA SHETTIGAR NALINI SHETTIGARTHI AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS D/O RAMA SHETTIGAR NANDHINI SHETTIGARTHI AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS D/O RAMA SHETTIGAR SRI. SANTHOSH SHETTIGAR S/O RAMA SHETTIGAR AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS PRAVESH SHETTIGAR S/O RAMA SHETTIGAR AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT "MATHRAPREMA NIVASA", NATLA, NEERE VILLAGE AT KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT - 574 102 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. RAMESHCHANDRA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER KUNDAPURA SUB DIVISION KUNDAPURA UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 101 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43120 WP No. 27767 of 2015 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER UDUPI DISTRICT UDUPI - 576 104 3. EXECUTIVE OFFICER KARNATAKA TALUK PANCHAYAT KARKALA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT - 574 104 4. KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN NO.5313, 2ND FLOOR, M.S. BUIDLING NO.204, 2ND STAGE AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R1, R2 AND R4 SRI. K. CHANDRANATH ARIGA, ADVOCATE FOR R3) ----- THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANN-A, AN ORDER PASSED BY THE R-1 DATED 26.03.1997 AND CONSEQUENTLY, QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY R-2 AND R-4 VIDE ANN-A1 AND APPEAL NO.735/04 ORDER DATED 04.06.2015 VIDE ANN-A2, WHICH ARE AFFIRMATIVE OF THE ORDER AT ANN-A AND ETC. 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 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43120 WP No. 27767 of 2015 ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the order dated 26.03.1997 passed by Respondent No.1 (Annexure-A) and the order dated 04.06.2015 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.735/2004 (Annexure-A2). 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. It is argued by Sri.Rameshchandra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that, the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the land bearing Sy.No.309/1 to an extent of 02 acres, in Sy.No.310/5 to an extent of 1.20 acres of Neere Village, Karkala Taluk, Udupi District. It is further argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, adjacent to the aforementioned land of the petitioner i.e., Warga land, Kumki lands are situated and therefore, it is contended that Kumki rights are attached to the adjacent Warga land holders i.e., the petitioner herein and therefore, earmarking the Kumki land for the purpose of distribution of sites under the Ashraya Scheme by the Revenue Authorities is incorrect and accordingly, sought for interference. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43120 WP No. 27767 of 2015 4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner, by referring to the Google Maps produced at Anenxures 'F' series, wherein the lands belonging to the petitioner is mentioned as Kumki lands and therefore, the same cannot be disputed by the Respondent-Authorities. Accordingly, it is submitted that, since Kumki rights are attached to the adjacent owner i.e., the petitioner herein and since the said aspect of the matter has not been considered either by Respondent No.1 or Respondent No.4, hence, sought for interference of this Court. 5. Per contra, Sri K.Chandranath Ariga, learned counsel appearing for Respondent no.3 invited the attention of the Court to Annexure-A and submitted that, the report of Respondent no.1 at Annexure-A would makes it clear that there is no Kumki land attached to the land belonging to the petitioner and the land in question has been earmarked for the purpose of distribution of sites to houseless persons under the Ashraya Scheme. Learned counsel further contended that, as the Respondent-Authorities including the Tribunal has arrived at the conclusion that the land in question is not in agricultural form and further the land that is claimed by the petitioner as a - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43120 WP No. 27767 of 2015 Kumki land attached to his land is not a Kumki land, and accordingly sought for dismissal of the petition. 6. Learned AGA invited the attention of the Court to the Memo dated 25.01.2024, wherein the letter dated 21.09.2023 by the Tahsildar, Karkala Taluk addressed to Respondent No.1 has been enclosed. It is stated in the said letter that, there is no Kumki land attached to the land belonging to the petitioner herein. It is also argued by the learned AGA, by referring to the affidavit dated 01.02.2024 filed by Respondent No.1 herein, wherein at Paragraph Nos.3 and 4 it is stated that, the land to an extent as claimed by the petitioner does not come within the purview of Kumki rights as the same has not been classified as Kumki lands and therefore, sought for dismissal of the writ petition. 7. In the light of the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties, it is noticed that, the petitioner is claiming that the land in question shown in Annexure-A is a Kumki land and it is situated adjacent to his land and therefore, he is having privilege over the same. The case of the petitioner is based on the Notice dated 18.09.1993 (Annexure-E) issued - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43120 WP No. 27767 of 2015 by the Tahsildar, Karkala. In the backdrop of these aspects, on careful consideration of Annexure-A it would indicate that there is no Kumki land adjacent to the land belonging to the petitioner. The said aspect of the matter is further clarified by letter dated 21.09.2023 addressed by the Tahsildar, Karkala to Respondent No.1 herein wherein it is clearly stated that the land in question reserved for house sites does not come within the purview of Kumki lands belonging to the petitioner, as claimed by him. That apart, on careful consideration of the Affidavit filed by Respondent No.1 before this Court at Paragraphs No.3 and 4 further clarifies the fact that, there is no Kumki land situated adjacent to the land belonging to the petitioner herein. 8. In that view of the matter, the entire case of the petitioner which is based on the Notice (Annexure-E) wherein it is mentioned that the land in question attached to the petitioner is a Kumki land, cannot be considered. It is also to be noted that, both Respondents No.1 and 2, having taken note of the material on record, have rightly come to the conclusion that the land in question is not a Kumki land and further, the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43120 WP No. 27767 of 2015 Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.735/2004 (Annexure-A2) at Paragraph No.7 has mentioned that the lands are not Kumki lands by referring to records and therefore, hearing the petitioner on this aspect does not arise at all. 9. In that view of the matter, as both the Quasi Judicial bodies as well as the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal have arrived at a conclusion that the land of the petitioner is not a 'Kumki land', I do not find any merit in the petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE rs CT-SG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26