- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32942 WP No. 25680 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 25680 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SRI.D. NARAYANASWAMY S/O LATE DODDAPILLA REDDY AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS R/O CHIKKATAGGALI VILLAGE JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI HOSAKOTE TALUK 562114 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR BHAT.A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560 001. 2. THE TAHASILDAR HOSKOTE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562114 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SESHU V., HCGP) Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32942 WP No. 25680 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT BEARING ENDORSEMENT NO.LNDORUCJ/3/2025, DATED 11-08-2025 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/THASILDAR, HOSAKOTE TALUK AS ANNEXURE-C AND ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO REFER THE FORM NO.53 BEFORE LAND GRANT COMMITTEE FOR DISPOSAL OF THE FORM NO.53, IN RESPECT OF SY.NO.29 TO AN EXTENT OF 2 ACRE OF CHIKKATAGGALI VILLAGE, JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER Learned High Court Government Pleader takes notice for both the respondents. 2. The petitioner claims to have filed an application on 03.12.1998 in Form No.53 seeking regularization of unauthorized occupation of 2.00 Acres of land in Sy.No.29 situated at Chikkataggali Village, Jadigenahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk. The petitioner is aggrieved of the impugned endorsement dated 11.08.2025 at Annexure-C issued by the Tahsildar, Hoskote Taluk, rejecting his application on the ground that the land is within the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32942 WP No. 25680 of 2025 prohibited distance of 18 k.m., from the boundary of the Bruhat Benglauru Mahanagara Palike. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court has held in several such cases, including the case of Sri.Ravikumar and Another Vs. The State of Karnataka and Others, which writ petition also arose from the same Hobli and same Taluk in W.P.No.237/2022 dated 17.01.2024, as to the manner in which the distance has to be measured. The learned counsel prays for similar orders. 4. This Court has held, having regard to the earlier decisions in the case of Sri.Ravikumar and Another (supra), as follows: "5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State and the Revenue Authorities and on perusing the petition papers, this Court is of the considered opinion that the law as to the consideration of the distance having regard to the date of the application has been settled by this Court. Therefore, all that is required to be done now at the hands of the respondent - Tahsildar is to - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32942 WP No. 25680 of 2025 find out the distance between the land in question and the boundary of Bangalore Mahanagara Palike as on the date of the application. Learned counsel had submitted during the course of the arguments that it appears that the boundaries of then Bangalore Mahanagara Palike were extended in the year 2007 by a notification. If that is the truth, then the Tahsildar is required to re-ascertain regarding the distance between the land in question and boundary of the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike as it was prior to 2007, if such a notification was issued and the boundaries of Bangalore Mahanagara Palike were extended in the year 2007. At any rate in terms of the law laid down by this Court in the case of Sri.Ashwathappa and others Vs. The State of Karnataka and others, in W.P.No.2411/2022 dated 18.02.2022, the distance has to be measured as per the geographical jurisdiction of local body as it was on the date of the application filed by the petitioners. 6. For that purpose, the writ petition is partly allowed while setting aside the impugned order dated 07.03.2018 passed by the Assistant Commissioner and all other earlier orders passed by the Tahsildar. The matter stands remanded to the Tahsildar, Hosakote with a specific direction that he shall decide as to what was the distance between the land in question and the boundary of then Bangalore Mahanagara Palike as it was as on the date of application i.e., in the year 1998. If it is clear that the land in question was not within the prohibited distance having regard to the boundaries of then Bangalore Mahanagara - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32942 WP No. 25680 of 2025 Palike, then the Tahsildar shall immediately proceed to issue Saguvali Chit in favour of the petitioners. The entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order." 5. Consequently, the writ petition stands disposed of. The impugned endorsement dated 11.08.2025 at Annexure-C issued by the 2nd respondent-Tahsildar, Hoskote Taluk, is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter stands remanded back to the respondent-Tahsildar, Hosakote Taluk, with a specific direction that he shall decide as to what was the distance between the land in question and the boundary of the then Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BMP) as it was as on the date of application i.e., 03.12.1998. If it is clear that the land in question was not within the prohibited distance having regard to the boundaries of the then Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BMP), then the Tahsildar shall place the report and application filed by the petitioner in Form No.53 before the Committee, the Committee shall consider - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32942 WP No. 25680 of 2025 the application of the petitioner and proceed to issue Saguvali Chit in favour of the petitioner. The entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 6. Needless to observe that till the disposal of the application, the petitioner shall not be dispossessed from the land in question. 7. Learned High Court Government Pleader is permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE DL CT: JL