- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9975 WP No. 105633 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 105633 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: SRI. VINAYAK SON OF MADAN HALAGEKAR AGE. 41 YEARS, R/AT SURVEY NO.103 SAMBAJI NAGAR, VADAGAON BELAGAVI -590005. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. AMRUTH VASANTH JOIS, ADV.) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT, 3RD GATE, 5TH FLOOR, MS BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDI BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BELAGAVI DISTRICT, BELAGAVI-590001. 3. THE ASSISTANT DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI 590001. 4. THE TAHASILDAR BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI- 590001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHARAD V. MAGADUM, ADV FOR R1 TO R4) THIS WP IS FILED PRAYING TO, BY ISSUE OF A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED. 29.02.2024 IN RB/RTA/167/2023-24 CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE ORDERS WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.08.16 12:14:42 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9975 WP No. 105633 of 2024 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) This petition is filed by the petitioner, challenging the order passed by the second respondent vide Annexure-E dated 29.02.2024 confirming the order passed by the respondent No.3 vide Annexure-D dated 03.07.2023. 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this Writ Petition are as follows: The petitioner had purchased lands in RS No.3/5 measuring 1 acre 33 guntas and in RS No.3/2024 measuring 9 guntas from his vendor through a power of attorney holder, one Suresh Babu Patil, on 08.03.2019. Based on the registered sale deed, the name of the petitioner was entered in the revenue records vide M.R.No.H/23/2018-19 dated 30.04.2019. The Tahasildar, without issuing notice, deleted the name of the petitioner from the revenue records vide order dated 02.06.2021. The petitioner, aggrieved by the order passed by the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9975 WP No. 105633 of 2024 Tahasildar, preferred an appeal before the third respondent in RA No.47/2022. Respondent No.3 dismissed the appeal vide order dated 03.07.2023. The petitioner, challenging the order passed by the Tahasildar and Assistant Commissioner, preferred a Revision Petition No.RTB/RTA/167/2023-24 before the second respondent. The second respondent dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioner. Hence, this Writ Petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned AGA for the respondents. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.4, without issuing any prior notice to the petitioner, has deleted the name of the petitioner in the records of rights pertaining to the properties purchased by the petitioner under the registered sale deed vide Annexure-A. He submits that the order passed by the 4th respondent violates the principles of natural justice. The said aspect was not considered by the Assistant - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9975 WP No. 105633 of 2024 Commissioner, and dismissed the appeal. He also submits that though the respondents allege that the properties in question are attached by the Govt. of Karnataka under the Depositors Protection Act, 2005, in fact, no such documents are furnished by the respondents to the petitioner. Hence, the order passed by respondent No.4 is contrary to the records and therefore, on these grounds, he prays to allow the Writ Petition. 5. Per contra, learned AGA submits that respondent No.4 will furnish a copy of the order of attachment of the properties in question, to the petitioner and thereafter providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, respondent No.4 will pass an order. Hence, the matter may be remitted to respondent No.4 and prays to dispose of the Writ petition. 6. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9975 WP No. 105633 of 2024 7. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had purchased the lands in question under the registered sale deed vide Annexure-A. Based on Annexure-A, respondent No.4 had passed a mutation order in M.R.No.H/23/2018- 19 vide Annexure-B. Respondent No.4, without issuing any notice to the petitioner, has passed an order and deleted the name of the petitioner from the revenue records. Before passing the said order, respondent No.4 had not conducted any enquiry. The procedure adopted by respondent No.4 violates the principles of natural justice. The said aspect was not considered by respondents No.2 and 3, and they passed the impugned orders. Thus, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, only on the limited grounds, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside. 8. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9975 WP No. 105633 of 2024 ORDER (i) The Writ Petition is allowed. (ii) The order dated 29.02.2024 passed by respondent No.2 vide Annexure-E and the order dated 03.07.2023 passed by the third respondent vide annexure-D, are set aside. (iii) Matter is remitted to respondent No.4 for re- consideration. (iv) Respondent No.4 is directed to furnish the documents to the petitioner, and after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE NAA CT: BSB List No.: 3 Sl No.: 2