- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39128 WP No. 29337 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO.29337 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. ASHWATHAMMA W/O. LATE NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS 2. SRINIVASA S/O. LATE NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 3. RAJAMMA D/O. LATE NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS 4. RANGASWAMY S/O. LATE NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 5. SRI SANTHOSH S/O. R. KEMPANNA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS 6. NATARAJU S/O. LATE NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT INJANAHALLI VILLAGE JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562 114 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI RAJESH GOWDA, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39128 WP No. 29337 of 2025 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA PRINCIPAL REVENUE SECRETARY M. S. BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DODDABALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION AT DODDABALLAPURA-561 203. 3. THE TAHSILDAR HOSAKOTE TALUK HOSAKOTE-562 114. 4. SRI MUNEGOWDA S/O. LATE MUNISWAMY GOWDA AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS 5. VENKATARAJU S/O. MUNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS 6. BALAKRISHNAPPA S/O. MUNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS RESPONDENT NOS.4 TO 6 ARE R/AT INJANAHALLI VILLAGE JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI HOSAKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562 114 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI V. SESHU, H.C.G.P., FOR R-1 TO R-3) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39128 WP No. 29337 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 12.02.2025, ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DODDABALLAPURA SUB- DIVISION AT DODDABALLAPURA, IN RA (HO) 37/2025, VIDE ANNEXURE-A, BY ALLOWING ABOVE PETITION AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO RESTORE THE APPEAL IN RA (H) 37/2025, IN ITS FILE. THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER Learned High Court Government Pleader takes notice for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Notice to respondent Nos.4 to 6 is not necessary for the following reasons: The petitioners are aggrieved of the impugned endorsement at Annexure-A dated 12.02.2025 issued by the respondent-Assistant Commissioner. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have filed an appeal in R.A (H):37/2024- 2025, invoking Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39128 WP No. 29337 of 2025 Revenue Act, 1964, questioning the mutation entries in M.R.No.5/1988-89 dated 03.07.1982 and M.R.No.11/2011-2012 dated 23.11.2011, however, the Assistant Commissioner has issued the impugned endorsement disposing of the appeal on the ground that it is not within the powers of the Assistant Commissioner to consider the appeal. 3. Having heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader, and on perusing the petition papers, it is clear that the claim of the petitioners is that Sri.Narayanappa, is the owner of 2.00 Acres of land in Sy.No.61 by virtue of Sale Deed dated 05.07.1982 and a subsequent Release Deed dated 20.08.1982. It is not disputed that the revenue entries have been mutated in favour of the private respondents herein in the year 1982, and subsequently certain other transactions have taken place and therefore, subsequent mutation entries are also found. It is clear that there is a dispute between the petitioners herein and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39128 WP No. 29337 of 2025 the private respondents regarding the extent of land, regarding their entitled. 4. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that having regard to the law laid down by this Court in the case of Smt.Jayamma and Others Vs. State of Karnataka Represented by Its Secretary, Department of Revenue and Others, 2020(1) KLR 213, the revenue authorities are not permitted to enter into disputed question of title. Therefore, although the impugned endorsement at Annexure-A has not been happily worded that the Assistant Commissioner is not the competent authority, nevertheless, the Assistant Commissioner will not be permitted to adjudicate on disputed questions of title. Therefore, the petitioners are required to approach the competent civil court for redressal of their grievances. 5. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39128 WP No. 29337 of 2025 6. Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand disposed of. 7. Learned High Court Government Pleader is permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE DL CT:VC