- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16520 WP No. 104211 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 104211 OF 2014 (LR) BETWEEN: 1. BASAPPA CHANNAPPA @ MUDUKAPPA GONTMAR SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’s., 1(a). PARVATEWWA W/O. BASAPPA GONTMAR AGE:75 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. CHACHADI, TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 1(b). BASAWWA W/O. ASHOK HADIMANI, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. CHACHADI, TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 1(c). MANJULA W/O. SOLAGAPPA YARAGATTI, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. CHACHADI, TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 1(d). MANJUNATH BASAPPA GONTMAR, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. CHACHADI, TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 1(e). BASAVARAJ BASAPPA GONTMAR, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. CHACHADI, TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGHCOURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16520 WP No. 104211 of 2014 1(f). MAHABALESHWAR BASAPPA GONTMAR, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. CHACHADI, TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. GIRISH S.HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE REGIONAL COMMISSIONER, BELAGAVI-590001. 2. THE TAHASILDAR, SAVADATTI-591126. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BAILAHONGAL-591102. 4. C.V.DESAI SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’s., SRI. NAGARAJ C. DESAI, R/O. CHACHADI VILLAGE, TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELGAUM-591126. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MALA B.BHUTE, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; NOTICE TO R4 IS SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO, ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER QUASHING THE ANNEXURE-F; SUCH OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTION AS DEEM FIT UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16520 WP No. 104211 of 2014 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) This petition is filed assailing the order dated 23.02.2013 passed by the Regional Commissioner, Belgaum. In terms of the said order, an endorsement is issued declining to entertain the petition under Section 118A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (Act, 1961) seeking revision of the order passed by Assistant Commissioner. 2. In terms of the order dated 22.06.2007 the Assistant Commissioner has dismissed the petitioner's appeal to enter petitioner’s name in the property records by assailing Entry No.804 of Chachadi Village, Taluk Savadatti. 3. The facts would reveal that the petitioner - Basappa Channappa Gontmar had filed Form No.7 under the Act, 1961 seeking occupancy in respect of 4 lands including Sy.No.25/2 measuring 3 acre 26 guntas and Sy.No.285/1B measuring 2 acre 24 guntas. 4. The jurisdictional Land Tribunal in terms of the order dated 20.05.1981 has allowed the application in part and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16520 WP No. 104211 of 2014 granted occupancy in respect of Sy.No.294/2 measuring 3 acres 25 guntas and Sy.No.45 measuring 13 acres in favour of Basayya Giddayya Pujeri and Sivappa Veerabasappa Ujjanukop respectively. However the petitioner's claim in respect of Sy.No.25/2 and Sy.No.285/1 referred to above is rejected on the premise that the petitioner himself is the owner of the property and he need not file Form No. 7 application seeking occupancy right. This order has attained finality. 5. However, the petitioner's name is not changed in the property records despite the declaration by the Land Tribunal that the petitioner is the owner of the aforementioned two properties. This prompted the petitioner to move an application before the Assistant Commissioner to delete the name of the State from the property records in Columns No. 9 and 12 on the premise that the property is not a tenanted land and cannot vest under Section 44 of the Act, 1961. The said appeal is dismissed in terms of the order dated 22.06.2007 and petitioner filed an application to revise the said order before the Regional Commissioner. Said application is dismissed in terms of the impugned endorsement. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16520 WP No. 104211 of 2014 6. It is noticed that there is a technical defect in the petition as the petitioner has not questioned the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner on 22.06.2007. However, considering the grounds and contentions urged and the documents placed on record, it is to be noticed that the petitioner is claiming right over the property as the owner of the property and the State is also heard in the matter. Thus notwithstanding, the technical defect in not seeking a prayer to challenge the order dated 22.06.2007, the Writ Petition is considered on merits relating to the petitioner’s claim and the claim of the State over the ownership of the properties. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the Tribunal which is the competent authority to decide as to which property is the tenanted property, who is the landlord and who is the tenant. Tribunal has given a finding that the original petitioner is the owner of the two properties referred to above, as such, the entry in the property records recording the name of the State as the owner and in possession is untenable and liable to be set aside. It is his further submission that entry is made without notice to the petitioner. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16520 WP No. 104211 of 2014 8. Learned Government Advocate would defend the impugned order on the premise that the revision is sought 6 years after the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner. It is her further submission that Mutation Entry No.804 is certified way back in 1974 and petitioner not having questioned the said mutation entry within a reasonable time, is precluded from claiming any right over the property. 9. The Court has considered the contentions raised at the bar and perused the records. 10. It is not in dispute that the Tribunal has declared that the petitioner as the owner of the properties by rejecting his Form No. 7 application seeking occupancy right. Said finding has attained finality. The Tribunal has the jurisdiction to decide as to whether the property is a tenanted property or not and to decide as to whether a person is in possession of the property as a tenant or not. Said authority has given a finding that the petitioner is the owner of the property. The State has not questioned the said finding. The finding has attained finality. This being the position, it was the obligation of the respondent- State to enter the petitioner's name in the property records pursuant - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16520 WP No. 104211 of 2014 to the declaration granted by the Land Tribunal. Merely because mutation No. 804 is certified recording the name of the State in respect of the petition properties along with some other properties, that does not mean that the property is the tenanted property or was the tenanted property immediately before 01.03.1974 and has vested with the Government. The vesting is permissible provided the land was tenanted land immediately before 01.03.1974. Since the finding of the Tribunal that the original petitioner is the owner of the property has attained finality, the endorsement issued by the Regional Commissioner is untenable. The order passed by the Assistant Commissioner on 22.06.2007 is also untenable. 11. Hence the following: ORDER (i) Writ Petition is allowed. (ii) Impugned endorsement dated 23.02.2013 is set aside. (iii) The Order dated 22.06.2007 passed by the Assistant Commissioner in proceeding No.KLR.AP.45/05-06 is set aside. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16520 WP No. 104211 of 2014 (iv) The Tahsildar, Savadatti shall enter the name of the petitioner in the property records of property bearing Survey No. 25/2 measuring 3 acres 26 guntas and Survey No. 285/1B measuring 2 acres 24 guntas in Chachadi Village, Savadatti and to remove the name of the State within 30 days from the receipt of the certified copy of this order. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE BRN CT:BCK LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 5