- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9169 WP No. 104429 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 104429 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: G. LAKSHMI ARUNA W/O. G. JANARDHANA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O. GANESH NAGAR, SIRUGUPPA ROAD, WARD NO.34, BALLARI -583 101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. G.R. VENKATESH MURTHY & SRI. SADYOJAT R. BALIGATTIMATH, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BALLARI DISTRICT STATION ROAD, BALLARI-583101. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BALLARI SUB-DIVISION, D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, STATION ROAD, BALLARI-583101. 4. TAHSILDAR, BALLARI TALUK, STATION ROAD, BALLARI-583101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.M.KHANNUR, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A. ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER DIRECTING RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONER’S REPRESENTATION DATED VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9169 WP No. 104429 of 2025 02.06.2025 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE A AND CONSEQUENTLY REMOVE THE IMPUGNED ENTRY MADE IN COLUMN NO.11 OF THE RTC (ANNEXURE B) REFERRING TO AN ALLEGED VIOLATION UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND REFORMS ACT, 1961, BASED ON AN ORDER DATED 06.05.2014 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.3, BEARING REFERENCE KUM/BUSU/79A/201/2013-14 IN RESPECT OF THE PETITIONER’S LAND IN SURVEY NO.597/B/2A1A1A1H, BALLARI VILLAGE, BALLARI HOBLI, BALLARI DISTRICT. B. ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER DIRECTING RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONER’S REPRESENTATION DATED 02.06.2025 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE A AND CONSEQUENTLY REMOVE THE GOVERNMENT RESTRICTION FLAG AS REFLECTED IN COLUMN NO. 11 ANNEXURE-B WHICH IS CURRENTLY PREVENTING THE PETITIONER FROM TRANSACTING WITH HER LAND SITUATED IN SURVEY NO.597/B/2A1A1A1H, BALLARI VILLAGE, BALLARI HOBLI, BALLARI DISTRICT AND ETC. THIS WRIT 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. This petition is filed by the petitioner seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondent No.3–the Assistant Commissioner, Ballari Sub-Division to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 02.06.2025 vide Annexure-A and to remove the impugned entry recorded in Column No.11 of the RTC/Pahani in respect of land measuring 16.66 acres situated in Survey No. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9169 WP No. 104429 of 2025 597/B/2alalalh (Old Sy.No.597/B/2a/1a/1a/1a), Ballari Village, Ballari Hobli, Ballari District. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that the said land was converted in accordance with law for non-agricultural residential use by two conversion orders dated 12.09.2003 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Ballari vide Annexures-D and E. The petitioner purchased the land through two sale deeds dated 19.10.2005, and her name was mutated in the revenue records. 3. A show cause notice dated 25.03.2014 was issued by respondent No.3 alleging a violation under Section 79A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). Though the petitioner challenged the maintainability of the proceedings, respondent No.3 kept the question open. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (KAT) in Appeal No. 653/2014. The KAT, by its order dated 30.12.2015 vide Annexure-F, allowed the petitioner’s - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9169 WP No. 104429 of 2025 application and quashed the proceedings under Section 79A of the Act. 4. Despite this, an entry is still recorded in Column No.11 of the RTC, which appears on the Kaveri portal and the same prevents the petitioner from transacting with the land. The petitioner submitted a representation dated 02.06.2025 requesting removal of the entry and the restriction, relying on the KAT’s final order. However, no action has been taken by respondent No.3 till today. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the continued existence of the entry conflicts with the conversion orders and the final order of the KAT. The same amounts to illegal record and restrict the petitioner’s right to own property and use her land. 6. The learned AGA submits that the representation made by the petitioner will be considered by the concerned respondents, provided a reasonable time is granted for the same. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9169 WP No. 104429 of 2025 7. Considering the facts on record and the undisputed order of the KAT quashing the proceedings under Section 79A of the Act and the submission made by the learned AGA, this Court is of the opinion that the representation of the petitioner requires consideration in accordance with law. 8. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i. The petition is allowed. ii. A Writ of Mandamus is issued directing respondent No.3 – the Assistant Commissioner, Ballari Sub-Division to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 02.06.2025 vide-Annexure A and to pass appropriate orders for removal of the impugned entry recorded in Column No.11 of the RTC/Pahani and the consequential government restriction flag on the Kaveri portal, in light of the order - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9169 WP No. 104429 of 2025 dated 30.12.2015 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. 653/2014. iii. Respondent No.3 shall give the petitioner an opportunity of hearing and shall pass a suitable order in accordance with law within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. iv. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of any other issue, except to direct compliance with the final order passed by the competent authority. v. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to take appropriate legal remedy, in accordance with law, in the event - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9169 WP No. 104429 of 2025 petitioner is aggrieved by the order that may be passed by respondent No.3. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE RHR/- CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 80