- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8622 WP No. 4788 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 4788 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. RAMANNA S/O. LATE HONNAPPA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, RESIDING AT HERAM NILAYA, BANNURU VILLAGE, PUTTURU TALUK, D K DISTRICT-574 203 REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SRI. NARAYANA A G, S/O. A V GANAPPAYYA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, RESIDING AT AJJANAGADDED, AMARAPADNURU VILLAGE, SULLIA TALUK, DK DISTRICT-574 314. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENUGOPAL M S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8622 WP No. 4788 of 2025 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, STATE BANK ROAD, MANGALORE-575 001. 3. THE THASILDAR, SULLIA TALUK, TALUK OFFICES BUILDING, SULLIA-574 239. 4. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, SULLIA TALUK, MINI VIDHANA SOUDH, 2ND FLOOR, SULLIA-574 239. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VENUGOPAL M.S. ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED. 07.10.2024 BEARING NO. NOC CR. 24/24-25 ISSUED BY THE R-3 VIDE ANNEXURE-P 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 - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8622 WP No. 4788 of 2025 ORAL ORDER Petitioner in the captioned petition is aggrieved by the endorsement dated 07.10.2024 bearing No.NOC CR:24/24-25 issued by the Tahsildar at Annexure-P. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader and perused the records. 3. Petitioner is the absolute owner of 04 acres 21 cents guntas in Survey No.237/2P. This land was granted to petitioner pursuant to recommendation made by the Land Grant Committee vide Order dated 27.09.2003. Pursuant to grant, 4th respondent-Tahsildar has issued saguvali chit on 14.11.2003. Petitioner acknowledges that authority while issuing saguvali chit, has mutated the land in the name of the petitioner as with effect from 15.11.2003 with a condition of non-alienation clause for 15 years. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:8622 WP No. 4788 of 2025 4. Petitioner has claimed that on account of family necessity, petitioner was forced to execute an agreement of sale on 24.09.2020. Therefore, petitioner tendered an application for issuance of survey sketch. This application was tendered online on 05.12.2018. Similarly, petitioner also applied to Respondent No.2 seeking permission to alienate the granted land. 5. The Respondent No.3-Tahsildar has issued the impugned endorsement declining to grant permission on the premise that the land in question is a granted land. Therefore, petitioner cannot alienate the same. Petitioner is before this Court aggrieved by the endorsement issued by the 3rd respondent. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the fact that, following the expiration of the non-alienation period, the statutory requirement under Rule 108-J(1)(i-a), which previously mandated a grantee to obtain prior permission from the Government before alienating the granted land, has been - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:8622 WP No. 4788 of 2025 omitted by way of a notification dated 24.02.2020. Consequently, there no longer exists any legal restriction on the alienation of such land. In light of this amendment, any condition imposing a requirement to seek prior approval for the sale of land after the completion of the non-alienation period, as indicated in the endorsement issued under Annexure-P, is rendered unsustainable in law. With the deletion of Rule 108-J(1)(i-a), the grantee is now vested with the unrestricted right to sell the property without obtaining prior sanction from the competent authority. Accordingly, this Court holds that the endorsement issued by the Tahsildar on 07.10.2024, which is based on an obsolete provision, is also unsustainable. Furthermore, the petitioner has submitted an online application requesting the relevant authorities to facilitate the process. In view of this, the authorities, particularly the 3rd respondent/Tahsildar, in coordination with the 4th respondent, are directed to take appropriate steps to address the issue of selling the land, ensuring - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:8622 WP No. 4788 of 2025 compliance with the legal framework governing such transactions. 7. For the foregoing reasons, this Court passes the following: ORDER (i) Writ Petition is allowed. (ii) Impugned endorsement at Annexure-P is hereby quashed. (iii) Respondent Nos.3 and 4/authorities are hereby directed to conduct phodi of the land in accordance with law. The Respondent No.3/Tahsildar is hereby directed to ensure that the restriction of securing permission after expiry of non- alienation period shall be removed strictly adhering to the Government notification. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:8622 WP No. 4788 of 2025 (iv) This exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE BNV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38 CT:SNN