- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24305 WP No. 25328 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 25328 OF 2022 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SIDDARAJU, S/O SANNJAVARAIAH, AGED 38 YEARS, R/AT MURUDAGALLI VILLAGE, JAYAPURA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT – 570 010. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NAGENDRA H.C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER, MYSURU DISTRICT, MYSURU – 570 001. 3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MYSURU SUB DIVISION, MYSURU – 570 001. 4. THE TAHSILDHAR, MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU – 570 001. Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24305 WP No. 25328 of 2022 5. L.SHIVANNA, S/O LATE LINGAPPA, AGED 69 YEARS, 6. L.BASAVARAJU, S/O LATE LINGAPPA, AGED 69 YEARS, 7. L.SWAMY, S/O LATE LINGAPPA, AGED 65 YEARS, 8. L.CHANDRAPPA, S/O LATE LINGAPPA, AGED 62 YEARS, 9. L.NAGARAJU, S/O LATE LINGAPPA, AGED 60 YEARS, 10. L.RAJASHEKARAMURTHY, S/O LATE LINGAPPA, AGED 58 YEARS, RESPONDENT NO.5 TO 10 ARE ALL R/AT MURUDAGALLI VILLAGE, JAYAPURA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT – 570 010. 11. SMT. K LAKSHMI M.R., W/O B. RAGHUNANDAN, AGED 44 YEARS, R/AT NO.2, 11TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN, N.R.COLONY, BENGALURU – 560 019. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.SAVITHRAMMA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; NOTICE IN RESPECT OF R5 IS HELD SUFFICIENT VIDE ORDER DATED 12.06.2025; R7 SERVED; SRI.H.N.BASAVARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R11) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24305 WP No. 25328 of 2022 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER RP NO.52/2021 DATED 25.01.2022 PASSED BY THE R2 WHICH IS FILED AS ANNEXURE - A TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the order dated 25.01.2022 (Annexure-A) in R.P.No.52 of 2021 on the file of Respondent No.2. 3. Having taken note of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the finding recorded by the respondent authorities would indicate that, the application has been filed challenging the mutation entries after 38 years. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24305 WP No. 25328 of 2022 4. In that view of the matter, the Respondent No.2 has arrived at a conclusion that as disputed question of facts are involved in so far as the title to the land in question property and as such, directed the parties to establish their right before the Civil Court. In that view of the matter, taking into consideration the fact that, the petitioner herein has to establish his right in so far as the schedule properties are concerned, I do not find any merit in the writ petition. However, it is open for the petitioner herein to prove his title in so far as the schedule land is concerned in a manner known to law. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE DH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 52