- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8060 WP No. 103784 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 103784 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. MALLAMMA W/O. BASAPPA URF SANNABASAPPA KUMBAR, AGE: 78 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O. INDARAGI VILLAGE, TQ AND DIST: KOPPAL-583231. 2. SRI. KALAKAPPA S/O. BASAPPA URF SANNABASAPPA KUMBAR, AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O. MARISHANTAVEERA NILAY, B.T. PATIL NAGAR, TQ AND DIST: KOPPAL-583231. 3. SRI. NAGAPPA S/O. BASAPPA URF SANNABASAPPA KUMBAR, AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O. INDARAGI VILLAGE, TQ AND DIST: KOPPAL-583231. 4. SRI. BASAVARAJ S/O. BASAPPA URF SANNABASAPPA KUMBAR, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O. VISHWACHETANA NILAY, BEHIND MATA HOTEL, TQ AND DIST: KOPPAL-583231. 5. SMT. NINGAMMA W/O. MALLIKARJUN KUMBAR, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O. RAJUR, TQ AND DIST: RON-583289. 6. SRI. BOJARAJ S/O. BASAPPA URF SANNABASAPPA KUMBAR, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O. INDARAGI VILLAGE, TQ AND DIST: KOPPAL-583231. 7. SMT. RATNAMMA W/O. SHIVAPUTRAPPA KUMBAR, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O. GONDABAL VILLAGE, VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8060 WP No. 103784 of 2025 TQ AND DIST: KOPPAL-583231. 8. SMT. AKKAMMA W/O. PAMPAPATI KUMBAR, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O. INDARAGI VILLAGE, TQ AND DIST: KOPPAL-583231. 9. SMT. GURUSIDDAMMA W/O. RAVI KUMBAR, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O. SAPTAGIRI 2ND CROSS, GADDANAKERI, TQ AND DIST: BAGALAKOTE-581701. 10. SRI. ESHAPPA S/O. RUDRAPPA KUMBAR, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O. INDARAGI VILLAGE, TQ AND DIST: KOPPAL-583231. 11. SRI. PAMPAPATI S/O. SANNA NINGAPPA @ NINGAPPA KUMBAR, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O. INDARAGI VILLAGE, TQ AND DIST: KOPPAL-583231. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. B.C. JNANAYYASWAMI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE TASILDHAR, KUSHTAGI, KOPPAL-583231. 2. SRI. HANUMATHAPPA @ HEMANT S/O. BASAPPA KUMBAR, AGE: 76 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, 3. SRI. KALAKAPPA S/O. BASAPPA KUMBAR, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, 4. SRI. SHARANAPPA S/O. BASAPPA KUMBAR, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 4 ARE R/O. KANDAKUR VILLAGE, TQ: KUSHTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL-583231. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.M. KHANNUR, ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8060 WP No. 103784 of 2025 AUTHORITY TO CONSIDER THE OBJECTION/REPRESENTATIONS FILED BY THE PETITIONERS DATED 24-03-2025 AS PER ANNEXURE- D, D1 AND D2 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) 1. Heard leaned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.M.M.Kannur, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1. 2. This Court does not find the need to issue notice to respondent Nos.2 to 4, as this Court is not inclined to pass a favourable order in favour of the petitioners. 3. This petition is filed for the writ of mandamus for direction to respondent No.1-Authority to consider the objection statement filed by the petitioners, as per the annexures D, D.1 and D.2. 4. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the private respondent Nos.2 to 4 have filed an application before the Tahasildar-respondent No.1 for change of mutation entries, to which the petitioners - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8060 WP No. 103784 of 2025 have objections, so also, it is contented by learned counsel that initially the petitioners filed suit seeking relief of declaration and perpetual injunction against respondent Nos.2 to 4, which came to be dismissed and aggrieved by the same, an appeal is preferred in R.A.No.15/2024, which is a pending application. This being the state of affairs, respondent Nos.2 to 4 have filed an application before Tahasildar-respondent No.1 for effecting change of mutation entries. Objections to this have been filed by the petitioners. This objection is sought to be considered by Tahasildar–respondent No.1 before passing any order. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate representing respondent No.1 contended that the objections are filed and the same would be considered in accordance with law and the present petition is not maintainable and premature, as no order is passed and the authorities would certainly consider the objection by giving an opportunity to the petitioners before passing any order. Petitioners filed a premeditated petition, which is not maintainable. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8060 WP No. 103784 of 2025 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AGA for respondent No.1. 7. I am agreed with the learned AGA that the present petition is premature, as no orders have been passed yet by respondent No.1 and to assume that respondent No.1 would not consider the objection, while passing the order for change of mutation entries is unsustainable. Under these circumstances, I proceeds to pass the following: ORDER This petition is dismissed as premature. Petitioners are at liberty to approach the appropriate authority, if he is aggrieved by any such order passed by respondent No.1-Tahasildar. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE AC CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4