- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42282 WP No. 24702 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 24702 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: SMT. KIRTHANA P. W/O SANTHOSHA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, SHANTHIPURA VILLAGE, LAKKAVALLI HOBLI, TARIKERE TALUK, CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT - 577 228. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MALATESH H., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, BENGALURU - 02. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT, CHIKMAGALURU - 577 101. 3. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER, TARIKERE TALUK, CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT - 577 228. Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42282 WP No. 24702 of 2025 4. THE TAHASILDAR, TARIKERE TALUK, CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT - 577 228. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHAMANTH NAIK, HCGP) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 07-03-2025 IN BEARING NO. NCR.CR.01/2024-25, E-692378 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT, PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER Learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for the respondents. 2. In the present petition, the endorsement dated 07.03.2025 is challenged. The petitioner has sought for effecting mutation in his name and had relied on order passed in WP.33116/2024. 3. This Court had directed the Tahsildar in the aforesaid proceedings to consider the representation of the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42282 WP No. 24702 of 2025 petitioner and mutate the name of the petitioner in the computerised RTC. The Court had observed that the computerisation process would require taking note of the manual RTC entries. 4. It is noticed that upon direction being issued by this Court, the respondent authorities have taken up the request of the petitioner and passed a detail order in which factual findings have been recorded including that no form for regularisation was filed and that records stated by the petitioner were absent upon verification. Taking note that the endorsement involves factual rectification, it would be appropriate to direct the petitioner to challenge the endorsement before the appellate authority as is permissible in law. 5. Needless to state that the possession of the petitioner is to be protected for the present till the petitioner seeks appropriate remedy against the endorsement and plea for interim prayer is considered. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42282 WP No. 24702 of 2025 Accordingly, possession of the petitioner would be protected for a period of four weeks from today. 6. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. All contentions are kept open. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE MCR