- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4636 WP No. 106266 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M.G.UMA WRIT PETITION NO.106266 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. R. SIRAJUDDIN S/O. RIYAZ AHAMAD, AGE: 53 YEARS,OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: 248, 4TH CROSS, JALI TAGGARGOD, NEAR YUSUF MASJEED, TALUK –BHATKAL, DISTRICT: UTTARA KANNADA - 581 320. …PETITIONER (BY SRI J. S. SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT, KARWAR DISTRICT: UTTARA KANNADA - 581 301. 3. THE TAHASILDAR, BHATKAL TALUK, DISTRICT: UTTARA KANNADA 581320. 4. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS DEPARTMENT OF SURVEY, BHATKAL TALUK, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA 581 320. 5. THE GRAMA PANCHAYAT MAVALLI, TQ: BHATKAL, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA 581 440 Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4636 WP No. 106266 of 2024 BY ITS PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER. 6. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECTRICITY) HESCOM, MURUDESHWAR, TQ: BHATKAL, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA 581 350. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI T.HANUMAREDDY, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; SRI B.S.KAMATE, ADVOCATE FOR R6; NOTICE TO RESPONDENT NO.5 - SERVED) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO:- A) ISSUE A WRIT OF WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION MADE BY THE PETITIONER FOR GRANT OF ALLUVIAL LAND AT MEASURING 4 GUNTAS ADJOINING TO HIS PROPERTY BEARING SY.NO.412/7 SITUATED AT MAVALLI-01 VILLAGE, BHATKAL TALUK, UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT UNDER SECTION 92 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION DATED 24.5.2024 MADE BY THE PETITIONER, THE COPY OF WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A. b) DIRECTION MAY KINDLY BE ISSUED TO THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 5 NOT TO DISPOSSESS THE PETITIONER FROM THE SCHEDULE LAND AND ALSO TRYING TO DEMOLISH THE PETITIONERS BUILDING SITUATED IN THE OWNERSHIP LAND OF THE PETITIONER TILL CONSIDERATION OF THE PETITIONER’S REQUEST FOR GRANT OF LAND UNDER SECTION 92 OF KARNATAKA LAND REFORMS ACT. c) IT MAY BE HELD THAT THE ACTION OF THE RESPONDENT NO.6 IN DISCONNECTING THE ESSENTIAL SERVICE OF ELECTRICITY WITHOUT EVEN GIVING THE PRIOR NOTICE AND AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE PETITIONER, AS PER THE NOTICE NO.BHATKAL.SAKANI/ EM.V/ SA.EM (TAM) 1024/ 25/ KA88/ 597-99, DATED 18-5-2024, THE COPY OF WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED HEREWITH AT ANNEXURE-Q, IS NULL AND VOID. D) APPROPRIATE DIRECTION MAY KINDLY BE ISSUED TO THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 5 NOT TO DISTURB TO THE PEACEFUL POSSESSION AND ENJOYMENT OF THE SCHEDULE LAND BY THE PETITIONER AND SUCH OTHER RELIEFS. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4636 WP No. 106266 of 2024 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M.G.UMA ORAL ORDER The petitioner has approached this Court seeking: (i) To issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing respondent No.2, to consider the representation dated 25.05.2024 made by him for granting the alluvial land measuring 4 guntas, adjoining to his property bearing Sy.No.412/7, situated at Mavalli-01 village, Bhatkal taluk, Uttara Kannada District under Section 92 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (“LR Act” for short) copy of which is produced as per Annexure- A. (ii) A direction to respondent No.2 to 5, not to dispossess the petitioner from the schedule land, and not to demolish the building built by the petitioner, till consideration of Annexure-A. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4636 WP No. 106266 of 2024 (iii) To hold that, the action of respondent No.6, of disconnecting the electricity without giving any prior notice, or opportunity of being heard by issuing communication dated 18.05.2024 as per Annexure-Q, to be null and void. (iv) To direct respondent Nos.2 to 5 not to disturb the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the schedule land by the petitioner. 2. Heard Sri J.S.Shetty, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri T.Hanumareddy, learned AGA for respondent Nos.1 to 4 – State and Sri B.S.Kamate, learned counsel for respondent No.6. Perused the materials on record. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that, 4 guntas of land adjoining his property bearing Sy.No.412/7 situated at Mavalli- 01 village, Bhatkal taluk is the alluvial land, for which he is entitled for a grant under Section 92 of - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4636 WP No. 106266 of 2024 KLR Act. The representation dated 24.05.2024 is produced as per Annexure-A is said to be still pending consideration before the Deputy Commissioner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is also entitled for other reliefs claimed in the petition. 5. It is the contention of the respondents that, the petitioner taking advantage of Section 81 of KLR Act is trying to put up a pakka building adjacent to his land. Section 81 of KLR Act refers to alluvial land which vests with the State Government. But the holder or occupant of the bank or shore on which such alluvial land is formed, is entitled to the temporary use thereof, until the same is disposed of by the Deputy Commissioner, subject to the provisions of Section 92 of KLR Act. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4636 WP No. 106266 of 2024 6. Section 92 of KLR Act, refers to the grant of alluvial land vested in the Government by the Deputy Commissioner with due regard to the interest of the public revenue, offering the same to the holder, or occupant of the bank or shore, on which such alluvial land has been formed. It is the contention of the petitioner that he had submitted the representation as per Annexure-A dated 24.05.2024. The Deputy Commissioner can consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 7. Learned AGA and learned counsel for respondent No.6 have brought to the notice of the Court, the notice dated 07.12.2023 produced as per Annexure-K, issued by the Panchayat Development Officer, Gram Panchayat, Mavalli, Bhatkal taluk, calling upon the petitioner to stop illegal construction of the building. Annexure-M is the notice dated 22.08.2024, issued by the - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4636 WP No. 106266 of 2024 Tahsildar, Bhatkal again asserting that, the petitioner is making illegal constructions and calling upon him to show cause as to why the encroachment should not be removed. Annexure- Q, is the letter addressed to the petitioner by respondent No.6, regarding illegal construction of the building to which the petitioner has taken temporary electricity connection. Learned counsel for respondent No.6 submits that, such temporary electricity could be given only for a period of two years, which have already lapsed. 8. The petitioner has challenged Annexure-Q to be null and void. It is the letter written by respondent No.6 based on the communication addressed to it by the Tahsildar, Bhatkal stating that the illegal construction of a multistoried building is undertaken by the petitioner. When the petitioner not challenging Annexures-K and M, he - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4636 WP No. 106266 of 2024 is not entitled for any relief in respect of Annexure-Q. 9. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner has not challenged either Annexure-K or Annexure- M or Annexure-Q, before this Court. All these annexures are produced incidentally to seek a direction to the Deputy Commissioner to consider his representation. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that, he has taken appropriate steps with regard to the claim made in Annexures- K, M and Q. Under such circumstances, I am of the opinion that no direction needs to be issued to the respondents regarding dispossession of the petitioner by demolishing the building or from disconnecting the electricity. 10. Section 81 of KLR Act specifically refers to the entitlement of the adjacent owner of the bank or shore, for temporary use of the alluvial land. However, unless it is granted under Section - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4636 WP No. 106266 of 2024 92 of the KLR Act, by the Deputy Commissioner, the petitioner cannot claim any right over the same to construct a pakka building. 11. In view of the above, the petitioner is not entitled for prayers made in this writ petition at (b), (c), (d) and (e). Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed in part. ii. Respondent No.2 – the Deputy Commissioner is directed to consider the representation dated 24.05.2024 produced as per Annexure-A filed by the petitioner in accordance with law. iii. The Writ Petition seeking other prays is dismissed. Sd/- (M.G.UMA) JUDGE EM CT:ANB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 21