- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2242 WP No. 35336 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 35336 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. GINIYAMMA, W/O MUNINARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT MYLANDAHALLI VILLAGE, VAKKALERI HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK, KOLAR - 563 130. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SOMASEKHARA K.H, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KOLAR SUB DIVISION, KOLAR - 563 130. 2. THE TAHASILDAR, KOLAR TALUK, KOLAR - 563 130. 3. REVENUE INSPECTOR, VAKKALERE HOBLI, KOLARA TALUK - 563 130. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH K, HCGP) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE R-2 DIRECT THE R-2 TO CONSIDER THE DIRECTION ISSUED BY THE R-1 IN R.A NO. 558/2022 DATED 03.08.2023 VIDE ANNX-C. Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2242 WP No. 35336 of 2024 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 captioned petition is filed seeking mandamus against respondent No.2-Tahsildar to mutate the petitioner's name by taking cognizance of the grant order obtained by the petitioner's grandfather, namely, Suguturu Munishamappa, on 02.08.1985. 2. Facts leading to the case are as under: The petitioner is asserting that her grandfather was granted 3 acres 20 guntas of land in Sy.No.56, situated at Mylandahalli village, Vakkalere Hobli, Kolar taluk. The petitioner contends that her grandfather was an unauthorised occupant and moved an application seeking regularization and the competent authority has issued a grant certificate vide No.LND-NCR-10/1985-86 and No.LND-NCR-14/1985-86 dated 02.08.1985. The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2242 WP No. 35336 of 2024 respondent No.2-Tahasildar, in not passing appropriate orders despite receipt of application seeking change of katha based on a grant order. The petitioner also alleges that respondent No.1-Assistant Commissioner has directed respondent No.2-Tahsildar to examine the documents and pass appropriate orders. 3. Learned HCGP submits that the petitioner's representation cannot be considered unless all supporting documents are furnished. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondents-State. Perused the records. 5. The petitioner asserts that the grant was issued in favor of her grandfather, as evidenced by the document marked as Annexure-A. This document has been annexed to the present application, and the petitioner relies solely on this evidence to substantiate her claim. The petitioner further contends that apart from the grant order, no - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2242 WP No. 35336 of 2024 additional documents are available to establish her right through her grandfather. Despite her best efforts, the petitioner is unable to furnish any further documentary proof in support of her claim, apart from the material already placed on record. Given this factual position, the petitioner submits that the absence of additional documentation should not prejudice her claim, particularly when the grant order itself serves as primary evidence of the grant in favor of her grandfather. 6. In light of the petitioner’s assertion that the grant order, as reflected in Annexure-A, which prima facie establishes the grant in favor of her grandfather, it becomes necessary for respondent No.2, the Tahsildar, to take cognizance of the said document. The Tahsildar is duty-bound to examine the grant order, verify its authenticity, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law. The failure of the authorities to act upon the petitioner’s request despite the availability of the grant order amounts to inaction on their part. Given the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2242 WP No. 35336 of 2024 circumstances, this case warrants the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondent No.2 to consider Annexure-A, verify its contents, and take necessary action without further delay. 7. For the foregoing reasons, this Court passes the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed; ii. Respondent No.2-Tahsildar, is hereby directed to consider the petitioner's request for a change of katha based on a grant order evidenced at Annexure-A to the writ petition; iii. If a true copy of a grant order is furnished, it is open for respondent No.2-Tahsildar, to secure original records relating to the survey number and thereafter proceed to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law; - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:2242 WP No. 35336 of 2024 iv. This exercise shall be accomplished within a period of three months from the date of receipt of order copy. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26 CT: BHK