- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8268 WP No. 33768 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.33768 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SRI.G.MUTHAPPA S/O LATE NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS RESIDENT OF NO.187, NEAR ANJANEYASWAMY TEMPLE GADENAHALLI VARAHUNASE POST BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU - 561257 …PETITIONER (BY SRI.VENUGOPAL M S, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001 2. THE THASILDAR YELAHANKA TALUK YELAHANKA BENGALURU 560 064 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.MANJUNATH K, HCGP) Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8268 WP No. 33768 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE R-2 TO EFFECT MUTATION AND ENTER THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF LAND IN SY. NO.22 MEASURING 2 ACRES SITUATED AT GADENAHALLI VILLAGE JALA 2 HOBLI, NOW YELAHANAKA TALUK, EARLIER BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, PURSUANT TO THE GRANT CERTIFICATE BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION DATED 14.10.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The petitioner is aggrieved by inaction on the part of respondent No.2 - Tahasildar in not effecting petitioner's name in terms of the Saguvali Chit issued pertaining to the petition land. Alleging inaction, this captioned writ petition is filed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP. 3. Learned HCGP referring to the records would point out that the petitioner has not produced the Grant - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8268 WP No. 33768 of 2024 Order and therefore, he seeks a short accommodation to seek instructions in the matter. 4. However, this Court is not inclined to accede to the prayer sought by the learned HCGP. 5. Upon a meticulous examination of the records submitted by the petitioner, it is evident that although the Grant Order itself has not been produced, the petitioner has placed on record a Certificate of Grant of Saguvali Chit in Form No.7, which is evidenced at Annexure-B. This document serves as a crucial piece of evidence supporting the petitioner’s claim. Additionally, to further substantiate the issuance of the Saguvali Chit based on the Grant Order, the petitioner has also produced the relevant entries from the Saguvali Chit issue register, which is annexed as Annexure-C. These records collectively indicate that the Grant Order was indeed acted upon, leading to the issuance of the Saguvali Chit. Furthermore, the petitioner has produced a notice issued by the jurisdictional Tahasildar, wherein the petitioner was - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:8268 WP No. 33768 of 2024 directed to remit the premium amount in terms of Sub- Rule (3) of Rule 108D of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules. In compliance with the said notice, the petitioner has also placed on record the receipt acknowledging payment of the premium amount. These significant documents firmly establish the petitioner’s case, demonstrating the legality and procedural adherence in the grant of the land. 6. In light of the aforementioned documentary evidence, this Court is of the considered opinion that Respondent No.2 - Tahasildar is duty-bound to verify the records meticulously and determine the appropriate course of action. The petitioner, by relying on these crucial records, has successfully demonstrated a legal right to seek a writ of mandamus from this Court. As the designated authority responsible for effecting the change of katha, Respondent No.2 - Tahasildar has a statutory obligation to thoroughly examine all the materials presented and issue a reasoned order in accordance with - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:8268 WP No. 33768 of 2024 law. Furthermore, should Respondent No.2 - Tahasildar require any additional clarification, it is well within his jurisdiction to summon the original records from his own office to facilitate a just and informed decision-making process. The duty of the Tahasildar in such matters is not merely administrative but also quasi-judicial, necessitating a fair and diligent examination of all relevant records before rendering a decision. ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed in favor of the petitioner. (ii) Respondent No.2 - Tahasildar is hereby directed to scrutinize the records placed on record by the petitioner and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law regarding the request for change of katha. (iii) Respondent No.2 - Tahasildar shall complete this entire exercise within a period of two - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:8268 WP No. 33768 of 2024 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (iv) If Respondent No.2 - Tahasildar finds the need for any further clarifications or verification, he is at liberty to summon original records from his office before arriving at a final decision. (v) The respondents shall ensure compliance with this order within the stipulated time frame to avoid any further legal complications. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13