- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34399-DB WA No. 1344 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI WRIT APPEAL NO. 1344 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: ALUMELAMMA W/O KAMBALAHALLI VENKATAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/A KADEHALLI VILLAGE, HAMPASANDRA POST - 561 209, GUDIBANDE TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. CHETHAN A.C, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT, CHIKKABALLAPUR - 562 101. 3. THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT, CHIKKABALLAPUR - 562 101. Digitally signed by SUMATHY KANNAN Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34399-DB WA No. 1344 of 2025 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, CHIKKABALLAPUR SUB DIVISION, CHIKKABALLAPUR - 562 101. 5. THE TAHSILDAR, GUDIBANDE TALUK, GUDIBANDE - 561 209, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NAVEEN CHANDRASHEKAR, AGA) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 13.06.2025 IN WP No- 16746/2025 DISMISSING THE WP FILED BY THE APPELLANT AND ALLOW WP No-16746/2025 (KLR-RES). THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34399-DB WA No. 1344 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. The appellant has filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 13.06.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge declining to entertain the appellant’s writ petition [W.P.No.16746/2025] on the ground that the appellant has an equally efficacious remedy to approach before the competent Tribunal. 2. Concededly, the appellant has such a remedy against an order rejecting his conversion application. 3. In view of the above, we find no fault with the decision of the learned Single Judge to decline the relief sought on the ground of alternate remedy. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 4. We clarify that the appellant is at liberty to avail such remedy, in accordance with law. 5. Pending application also stands disposed of. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE YN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28 CT: BHK