- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5811 WP No. 29708 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 29708 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: DR. S. RAJENDRA, S/O. LATE. N. SOMASHEKARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT NAGUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT- 571 477. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRINIVASA D.C, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MANDYA DISTRICT, D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, MANDYA - 571 401. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, PANDAVAPURA SUB-DIVISION, Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5811 WP No. 29708 of 2024 A.C. OFFICE, PANDAVAPURA TOWN, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 434. 4. THE TAHASILDAR, SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK, OFFICE OF TAHASILDAR, SRIRANGAPATNA TOWN AND TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 438. 5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, REVENUE SETTLEMENT AND LAND RECORDS, K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 001. 6. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, OFFICE OF TAHASILDAR, SRIRANGAPATNA TOWN AND TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 438. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH K, HCGP) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE R-4 IN NO. L.N.D.C.R.288/2022-23 DATED 27.06.2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-S AS ILLEGAL, VOID AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL 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:5811 WP No. 29708 of 2024 ORAL ORDER The captioned petition is filed by the petitioner feeling aggrieved by the endorsement issued by respondent No.4-Tahsildar, vide Annexure-S. 2. The petitioner, who is a subsequent purchaser of agricultural land, moved an application seeking phodi and durasti in respect of petition lands bearing Sy.No.239/P-1 measuring 18 guntas, Sy.No.239/P-3 measuring 16 guntas and Sy.No.239/P-4 measuring 2 acres 17.8 guntas, situated at Chandagalu village, Kasaba Hobli, Srirangapatna Taluk, Mandya District. The petitioner asserts that these lands were subject matter of land tribunal proceedings. The petitioner asserts that these lands were granted in favour of one Venkoji Rao. The original grantee, Venkoji Rao gifted this property in favour of his daughter-in-law, Smt.Chandra Bai, on 02.09.1946. Out of the aforesaid three properties, the said Smt. Chandra Bai in turn sold Sy.No.239/P-1 measuring 18 guntas and Sy.No.239/P-3 measuring 16 guntas in favour - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5811 WP No. 29708 of 2024 of Pillaiah S/o Dasagowda under a registered sale deed dated 03.12.1968. The said Pillaiah S/o Dasagowda in turn sold it to Bettegowda S/o Puttegowda on 04.12.1968. The said Bettegowda S/o Puttegowda sold the properties in favour of one Smt.Jayamma w/o Boraiah on 27.11.1972. The petitioner asserts that one Pillaiah s/o Dasegowda was the owner and had sold it to Bettegowda filed Form No.7 before the Land Tribunal, Srirangapatna. The Land Tribunal, Srirangapatna, vide order dated 06.10.1981, granted occupancy rights to said Pillaiah and the petitioner claims to have purchased this land under registered sale deed dated 22.06.2006. 3. Respondent No.4-Tahasildar, has issued an endorsement which is now impugned on the ground that the petitioner has not produced any documents. However, before this Court, the petitioner has placed on record all title documents which are reflected in the synopsis. The petitioner has also placed on record the land tribunal order evidenced at Annexure-K. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:5811 WP No. 29708 of 2024 4. The learned High Court Government Pleader (HCGP) has put forth a contention that the endorsement in question was issued due to the fact that the petitioner’s application was not accompanied by the requisite title documents. According to the learned HCGP, the absence of these supporting documents rendered the application incomplete, thereby justifying the issuance of the impugned endorsement. 5. Contrarily, the learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously countered this assertion, emphasizing that all the necessary title documents were duly submitted along with the application. It is contended that the petitioner had furnished comprehensive documentation, including relevant records, to substantiate the claim. The learned counsel has further argued that despite the submission of these documents, the authorities failed to take the necessary steps in processing the application, which has necessitated the filing of the present writ petition. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:5811 WP No. 29708 of 2024 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP at length and having meticulously perused the records placed before this Court, it is evident that the petitioner has indeed produced the requisite title documents. The documents include an order passed by the Land Tribunal, Srirangapatna, which conferred occupancy rights upon the vendor of the petitioner. This vendor, in turn, executed a registered sale deed in favor of the petitioner on 22.06.2006, thereby legally transferring the property in question. The presence of these documents strongly supports the petitioner’s claim, and the denial of the requested relief on the ground of non-submission of documents is not sustainable. 7. Be that as it may, given the available records and the submission made by both parties, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondent No.4- Tahsildar to treat the present writ petition as an application for carrying out the necessary phodi and durasti work in relation to the subject property. Since the - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:5811 WP No. 29708 of 2024 petitioner has produced credible documents, including the land tribunal’s order and the registered sale deed, the revenue authorities are obligated to verify these records and proceed in accordance with the law. 8. Furthermore, the learned HCGP has fairly submitted before this Court that the respondent No.4- Tahsildar will consider this petition as an application and will undertake the necessary steps for securing relevant records. Upon verification of the documents and ensuring their authenticity, the authorities shall take appropriate measures to complete the process of phodi and durasti as per legal requirements. This assurance by the learned HCGP has been recorded by this Court. 9. In view of the above discussion, this Court passes the following ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:5811 WP No. 29708 of 2024 ii. The impugned endorsement issued by respondent No.4-Tahsildar in NO. L.N.D. C.R.288/2022-23 DATED 27.06.2023 vide Annexure-S is hereby quashed and set aside. iii. The learned HCGP is directed to forthwith transmit a copy of this writ petition, along with all annexures, to respondent No.4- Tahsildar for necessary action. iv. Respondent No.4-Tahsildar, upon receipt of the writ papers, shall take immediate steps to secure all relevant records from the competent authority and conduct a thorough verification of the same. v. Upon confirming the authenticity of the title documents, including the land tribunal’s order, respondent No.4-Tahsildar, in coordination with respondent No.6-Assistant Director of Land Records, shall proceed to undertake the phodi work and demarcate the - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:5811 WP No. 29708 of 2024 property purchased by the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law. vi. The entire process, including the verification of records and execution of phodi and durasti work, shall be completed expeditiously and, in any case, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the writ papers from the Advocate General’s office. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16 CT: BHK