- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16872 WP No. 100190 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO.100190 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. TAJABEE W/O. HUSSAIN PEER AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O. BASAPATTANA, TQ: GANGAVATHI, DIST: KOPPAL. 2. SHAIKH HUSAIN S/O. BUDANSAB AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. BASAPATTANA, TQ: GANGAVATHI, DIST: KOPPAL. 3. KHAJA HUSAIN S/O. HUSAINSAB AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. BASAPATTAN, TQ: GANGAVATHI, DIST: KOPPAL. 4. RAJMAHAMAD S/O. NABISAB AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. BASAPATTANA, TQ: GANGAVATHI, DIST: KOPPAL. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. B.SHARANABASAWA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS KALABURGI DIVISION KALABURGI, TQ AND DIST: KALABURGI. 2. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16872 WP No. 100190 of 2025 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, KOPPAL, TQ. AND DIST: KOPPAL. 3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, GANGAVATHI, TQ: GANGAVATHI, DIST: KOPPAL. 4. THE SUPERVISOR, THE OFFICE OF ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, GANGAVATHI, TQ: GANGAVATHI, DIST: KOPPAL. 5. THE SURVEYOR THE OFFICE OF ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, GANGAVATHI, TQ: GANGAVATHI, DIST: KOPPAL. 6. AMJAD ANSARI S/O. D.M.S.ANSARI AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. WARD NO.13, ISLAMPUR, GANGAVATHI, TQ: GANGAVATHI, DIST: KOPPAL. 7. M/S NETRA FARMS AND ESTATES PVT. LTD., REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SHRI. PERATI SRINIVAS REDDY S/O. LATE PERATI NARASIMHA REDDY, R/O. NO.5-85/121/A, NANDI HILLS, JUBALI HILLS SHAIKHPET, JUBALI HILLS, HYDERABAD (TELANGANA)-500033. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MALA B.BHUTE, AGA FOR R1 TO R5; SRI. SANJAY CHANAL, ADVOCATE FOR R7; NOTICE TO R6 IS SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 20/07/2024 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 29/11/2023 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-B1, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16872 WP No. 100190 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondents No.1 to 5 and learned counsel appearing for respondent No.7. 2. Though notice was served on respondent No.6, he remained unrepresented. 3. This petition is filed assailing the order dated 20.07.2024, marked as Annexure-C passed by respondent No.1-Joint Director of Land Records; the order dated 29.11.2023, marked as Annexure-B1 passed by respondent No.2; and the notices issued for conducting a survey of the land, marked as Annexures-A, A1 to A9. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16872 WP No. 100190 of 2025 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner No.1 was not notified before conducting the survey; the notice was in fact issued to her husband, who died on 28.06.2021. The alleged survey was conducted on 29.08.2022. Thus, it is evident that the survey was conducted without notice to petitioner No.1, is the submission. It is admitted that the notice was issued to the remaining petitioners. 5. Learned counsel for respondent No.7 would submit that petitioner No.1 was present when the survey was conducted, as such, impugned orders have to be sustained. It is also his further submission that Civil Suit is filed seeking appropriate relief to seek possession from the encroacher, namely the petitioners. Thus, urged that the petition be dismissed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16872 WP No. 100190 of 2025 6. The Court has considered the contentions raised at the Bar and perused the records. 7. The records would reveal that survey was conducted after the death of husband of petitioner No.1. Notice is not issued to petitioner No.1 before conducting survey. Based on records, the Court is not in a position to give a finding that petitioner No.1 was present and the survey was conducted. 8. Since it is also submitted that the Civil suit is pending based on the survey which is disputed before this court, the Court is of the view that without getting into the merits of the order passed by the Surveyor, Deputy Director of Land Records and the Joint Director of Land Records, the orders are to be set-aside on the technical ground that the notice is not issued to petitioner No.1. This does not mean that the Court has recorded a finding relating - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16872 WP No. 100190 of 2025 to the correctness of the sketch. The sketch may be or may not be correct. 9. Since the suit is pending, there shall be a fresh order to conduct the survey of the property by issuing notice to all the parties to the suit. The Court shall consider the said survey and other evidence and pass appropriate orders. 10. Hence, the following: ORDER i. The petition is disposed of. ii. Impugned order dated 20.07.2024 passed by respondent No.1 marked at Annexure-C; impugned order dated 29.11.2023 passed by respondent No.2 marked at Annexure-B1 and impugned survey records and orders passed by respondents No.3 to 5 marked at Annexures-A, A1 to A9, are set-aside, - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16872 WP No. 100190 of 2025 without giving any findings on the correctness or otherwise of the survey sketch. iii. The both parties to the suit are permitted to furnish ‘Memo of Instructions’ to enable the Taluka Surveyor to conduct the survey of the property in accordance with law. iv. The Trial Court shall consider the report in accordance with law and thereafter, shall decide the case on merits. v. Merely because impugned orders are set-aside, that does not mean that the Court has expressed opinion on the correctness of the sketch produced. vi. It is made clear that whether the properties are properly measured or not, whether the sketch is properly prepared or not, is not considered by this Court. That question shall be considered by the Trial Court based on the survey report to be - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16872 WP No. 100190 of 2025 secured by the Trial Court. After considering the entire evidence to be placed before it, the suit shall be decided on merits. vii. Before ordering survey, the guidelines laid down in Shadaksharappa vs Kumari Vijayalaxmi and Others1 shall be followed to the extent possible. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE PMP/AM Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37 1 ILR 2023 Kar 3983