- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44122 WP No. 2505 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT PETITION NO. 2505 OF 2020 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: 1. 1(a) 1(b) 1(c) RAVI SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR’S SMT. SARASWATHAMMA W/O LATE RAVI AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS MANOJ R S/O LATE RAVI AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS JYOTHI R D/O LATE RAVI AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS 1(a) TO 1(c) R/AT KAMENAHALLI VILLAGE, KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK-562110, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MAHESH A S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY, Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44122 WP No. 2505 of 2020 DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE TAHSILDAR DEVANAHALLI TALUK-562 110. BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. 3. REGULARISATION OF UNAUTHORISED OCCUPATION OF LAND COMMITTEE REP BY ITS SECRETARY TAHSILDAR, DEVANAHALLI TALUK-562 110. BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. 4. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DODDABALLAPUR SUB DIVISION, DODDABALLAPUR-561203, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.NEELAKANTAPPA K.PUJAR., HCGP FOR R1 TO R4) THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SECURE RECORDS AND QUASH THE ORDER DTD.1.7.2019 VIDE ANENXURE-AB PASSED BY THE R-4 AND GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE OPERATION OF THE ORDER DTD.1.7.2019 PASSED BY THE R-4 VIDE ANNEXURE-AB. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44122 WP No. 2505 of 2020 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers: "a) issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 01.07.2019 vide ANNEXURE 'AB' passed by the 4th respondent/Assistant Commissioner, Doddaballapur Sub Division, Doddaballapur in Case No.RUC(A)150/2017 and No.RUC (A).39/13-14; b) issue any other writ or order or direction that deems fit to grant in the circumstance of the case; with cost in the interest of justice and equity." 2. The petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 01.07.2019 passed in R.U.C.(A)39/13-14 by the respondent-Assistant Commissioner, Doddaballapura Sub- Division, Doddaballapura, has approached this Court with the above prayers. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44122 WP No. 2505 of 2020 3. It is the case of the petitioner that he had filed an application in Form No.53 on 15.07.1999 for regularisation of unauthorised occupation and cultivation of land and the Committee for Regularisation has granted the land in Sy.No.31 measuring 2 acres 25 guntas of Kamenahalli Village, Kundana Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District on 18.08.2007 in favour of the petitioner. 4. After passing the grant order, the concerned Tahsildar has failed to issue the saguvali chit in the name of the petitioner and as such, the petitioner approached this Court in W.P.No.36293/2009. The said writ petition was allowed on 09.12.2009 and as per the directions of this Court, the Tahsildar has issued the saguvali chit on 05.06.2010. However, the concerned Revenue Department failed to conduct the phodi and durasthi of the subject land and as such, the petitioner once again approached this Court in W.P.No.44942/2011 and as per the directions of this Court, the phodi and durasthi of the subject land was conducted by the concerned revenue - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44122 WP No. 2505 of 2020 authorities. Thereafter, the petitioner was in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject land. However, the Tahsildar of Doddaballapura Sub-Division, approached the Assistant Commissioner under Rule 108K of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules, 1966' for the sake of brevity) alleging that the petitioner and others were illegally granted the subject land i.e., Sy.No.31 of Kamenahalli Village, Kundana Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, since the land belongs to the Government and the same comes within a radius of 18 kms. of the BBMP limits. 5. The Assistant Commissioner based on the said report of the Tahsildar, issued notice to the petitioner and others and by considering the objections filed by the petitioner, passed the impugned order by setting aside the grant made in favour of the petitioner of the subject land and also directed to enter the name of the Government in the RTC. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner is before this Court. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44122 WP No. 2505 of 2020 6. I have heard Sri Mahesh A.S., learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Neelakantappa K.Pujar, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 7. The primary contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that though the petitioner has placed sufficient documents to prove that as on the date of filing of the application before the Committee for Regularisation i.e., in the year 1999, the land was not situated within the limits of Bengaluru City, as such, Rule 108K of the Rules, 1966, is not applicable in respect of the subject land. 8. The learned Counsel also contended that the Assistant Commissioner has not granted sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to put forth the above facts and also to place the documents before him. To substantiate the said aspect of the matter, he emphasised on the order sheet of the proceedings in R.U.C.(A).39/13- 14 before the Assistant Commissioner. Accordingly, the learned Counsel prays to set aside the impugned order. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44122 WP No. 2505 of 2020 9. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader has supported the impugned order passed by the Assistant Commissioner that the subject land belongs to the Government and squarely falls within the limits of the BBMP as on the date of the grant. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the writ petition. 10. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by learned counsels for both the parties and I have perused the entire records including the impugned order passed by the Assistant Commissioner. 11. As could be gathered from the records, originally the land was granted to the petitioner in the year 1999 and thereafter, by virtue of the order passed by this Court, saguvali chit was issued, so also the phodi and durasthi of the subject land was conducted and the petitioner was in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land. 12. Subsequently, after a lapse of nearly ten years, the Assistant Commissioner suo motu initiated the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44122 WP No. 2505 of 2020 proceedings based on the report of the Tahsildar. It could be gathered from the impugned order that the Assistant Commissioner has cancelled the grant order made in favour of the petitioner only on the ground that the subject land is situated within a radius of 18 kms. from the limits of the BBMP. As such, Rules 108K and 108D(6) of the Rules, 1966, came to be invoked by the Assistant Commissioner. However, while deciding so, the Assistant Commissioner, has not extended sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to place the relevant documents on record. It could be seen from the order sheet dated 03.09.2014, the Assistant Commissioner has passed an order that the case was taken on record for further enquiry/hearing. Thereafter, the Assistant Commissioner without extending such opportunity, proceeded to pass the impugned order. 13. In such circumstances, in my considered opinion, the Assistant Commissioner erred while passing the impugned order without extending an opportunity to the petitioner to place the relevant documents and to urge all - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44122 WP No. 2505 of 2020 his contentions. In that view of the matter, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. The matter requires reconsideration at the hands of the respondent-Assistant Commissioner. 14. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER i) The writ petition is allowed. ii) The impugned order dated 01.07.2019 at Annexure 'AB' passed by the respondent- Assistant Commissioner is quashed and set aside. iii) The matter stands remanded back to the respondent-Assistant Commissioner, Doddaballapur Sub-Division, Doddaballapur, Bengaluru Rural District, with a direction to reconsider all the relevant documents and also to consider the aspect as to whether the land was situated within a radius of 18 kms., of the limits of BBMP as on the date of filing of the application, as held by the co-ordinate - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44122 WP No. 2505 of 2020 Bench of this Court in W.P.No.2411/2022 disposed of on 18.02.2022. iii) The parties are directed to appear before the respondent-Assistant Commissioner, on 2nd December 2025, without waiting for further notice from the Assistant Commissioner. iv) The respondent-Assistant Commissioner shall conclude the enquiry as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE JT/- CT: JL