- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:7785 WP No. 20170 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.20170 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: RAJESH S/O VENKATESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS MARAPPALLI VILLAGE KAIWARA HOBLI CHINTAMANI TALUK CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT PIN CODE - 562104 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRASANNA D P, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPT OF REVENUE VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560001 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT CHIKKABALLAPUR - 562101 3. THE TAHSILDHAR CHINTAMANI TALUK CHINTAMANI 563125 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.B.P.RADHA, AGA) Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7785 WP No. 20170 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONER DATED 18.04.2024, AS PER ANNEXURE-C EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE 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 compelled to knock the doors of the Writ Court alleging inaction on the part of respondent No.3 - Tahasildar in not placing the petitioner's application filed in Form No.57 seeking regularization of an unauthorized cultivation of the agricultural land bearing Sy. No.76 measuring 1 acres 9 guntas of Marappalli Village, Kaiwara Hobli, Chintamani Taluk. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned AGA. Perused the records. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7785 WP No. 20170 of 2024 3. The petitioner is seeking regularization of his unauthorized cultivation over the land bearing Sy. No.76 measuring 1 acres 9 guntas of Marappalli Village, Kaiwara Hobli, Chintamani Taluk. The records reveal that though an application in the prescribed form is tendered on 18.12.2018, there is incomplete inaction on the part of respondent No.3 - Tahasildar in not subjecting the petitioner's application to scrutiny and secure spot inspection and other evidence from the Revenue Inspector and Village Accountant. 4. This Court is more than satisfied that respondent No.3 - Tahasildar has failed to discharge his duty by following the mandate provided under Sub Rule (3) of the 108CCC of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules. Petitioner therefore has a legal right to seek adjudication of the application filed in Form No.57. Respondent No.3 is equally obligated to place the petitioner's application before the Committee. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:7785 WP No. 20170 of 2024 5. Since there is inaction on the part of the respondents, this is a fit case, where mandamus lies. 6. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following; ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) Respondent No.3 - Tahasildar shall secure spot inspection as provided under Sub-Rule (3) of 108CCC of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules within a period of two months from the date of receipt of order copy. (iii) If the petitioner's application is found eligible, the same shall be placed before the Land Grant Committee for further course of action. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2