- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51070 WP No. 58129 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT PETITION NO. 58129 OF 2017 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SRI.K. RAMESH ACHARY S/O LATE SUBRAYA ACHARY, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS OCC:AGRICULTURIST, R/AT KADESHWALYA VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK, D.K DISTRICT-574 325 SINCE DEAD BY LR'S 1(a) SMT. BHAGIRATHI W/O LATE K. RAMESH ACHARY AGE: 65 YEARS 1(b) SRI. MOHANA S/O LATE K. RAMESH ACHARY AGE: 42 YEARS 1(c) YASHODHARA S/O LATE K. RAMESH ACHARY AGE: 40 YEARS 1(d) SMT. LATHA D/O LATE K. RAMESH ACHARY W/O DR. VISHWANATHACHARYA S AGE: 37 YEARS Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51070 WP No. 58129 of 2017 1(e) SRI. SRIPATHI S/O LATE K. RAMESH ACHARY AGE: 31 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT KANDIGA HOUSE KADESHWALYA VILLAGE BANTWAL TALUK D.K. DISTRICT-574 325 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRASANNA V.R, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPT.OF REVENUE, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER D.K DISTRICT, MANGALORE-575 001 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MANGALORE SUB-DIVISION, MANGALORE-575 001 4. THE ADDL.COMMITEE FOR REGULARISATION OF UN-AUTHORISED OCCUPATION OF THE LANDS, BANTWAL TALUK, D.K DISTRICT-574219 BY ITS CHAIRMAN 5. SRI ISHWARA POOJARY S/O VENKAPPA POOJARY, AGE:MAJOR, OCC:AGRICULTURE, R/AT KADESHWALYA VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK, D.K DISTRICT-574 325 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51070 WP No. 58129 of 2017 SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS 5(a) SMT. VEERAMMA W/O LATE ISHWARA POOJARY AGE: MAJOR 5(b) SMT. LEELA W/O LATE ISHWARA POOJARY AGE: MAJOR 5(c) SRI. GANGADHARA S/O LATE ISHWARA POOJARY AGE: MAJOR 5(d) SMT. SHARADA D/O LATE ISHWARA POOJARY AGE: MAJOR 5(e) SRI. NARAYANA S/O LATE ISHWARA POOJARY AGE: MAJOR 5(f) SMT. UMAVATHI D/O LATE ISHWARA POOJARY AGE: MAJOR 5(g) SMT. GEETHA D/O LATE ISHWARA POOJARY AGE: MAJOR 5(h) SMT. HEMAVATHI D/O LATE ISHWARA POOJARY AGE: MAJOR 5(i) SMT. YASHODA D/O LATE ISHWARA POOJARY AGE: MAJOR 5(j) SRI UMESH S/O LATE ISHWARA POOJARY AGE: MAJOR - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51070 WP No. 58129 of 2017 5(k) SMT. SUMITRA D/O LATE ISHWARA POOJARY AGE: MAJOR ALL ARE R/AT KADESHWALAYA VILLAGE BANTWAL TALUK D.K. DISTRICT-574 325 AMENDED AS PER COURT ORDER DATED.01.02.2024 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL CARIAPPA K.S, AGA FOR R1 TO R4, R5(A) TO R5(K) IS SERVED - UNREPRESENTED) THIS WP FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTIO OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH THE ORDER DATED 23.06.2017 IN REVISION PETITION NO.22/2009 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING N 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51070 WP No. 58129 of 2017 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL ORDER The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 23.06.2017 in R.P.No.22/2009 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal as per Annexure - A and order dated 29.12.2008 in C.Dis:RAP:252/2006-07 passed by respondent No.2- Deputy Commissioner as per Annexure - B. 2. The grievance of the petitioners is that petitioner No.1 - K. Ramesh Achary, who is the husband of petitioner No.1(a) and father of petitioner Nos.1(b) to 1(e) is the owner of Kadim Warga lands bearing Sy.Nos.59/1, 59/2, 59/3, 59/4 and 59/5 of Kadeshwalya Village, Bantwal Taluk, Dakshina Kannada District, which is totally measured 3.99 acres. The abutting government lands bearing Sy.Nos.47, 56, 58/1A (58/A), 66 and 67 are the Kumki privilege to Kadim Warga to K.Ramesh Achary and he is using the Kumki privilege. He also raised some coconut and cashew trees in the said land. Accordingly, he - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51070 WP No. 58129 of 2017 filed Form No.53 under Section 94-B of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 seeking regularization before the Regularization Committee. 3. However, a rival claim was made by respondent No.5-Sri.Ishwara Poojary in respect of same land for regularization and the Committee has passed an order dated 06.07.2001 by regularizing the land in favour of respondent No.5 without considering the rival claim made by K. Ramesh Achary. The said order has been challenged by K. Ramesh Achary before the Assistant Commissioner in C.Dis.R.A.2/2001-02. The Assistant Commissioner has allowed the said appeal by setting aside the order passed by the Committee and remitted the matter back to the Committee for fresh consideration of rival claims. On remand, the Regularization Committee without complying the order and without conducting any such enquiry in respect of rival claims, issued a Saguvali Chit dated 10.06.2003 and again granted land measuring 8 cents in Sy.No.67/1C of Kadeshwalaya Village, Bantwal Taluk as - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51070 WP No. 58129 of 2017 per Annexure-D in favour of respondent No.5. However, the said order has been once again challenged by K. Ramesh Achary before the Assistant Commissioner. The Assistant Commissioner has passed an order dated 25.10.2006 as per Annexure-C by affirming the order passed by the Committee. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, K. Ramesh Achary approached the Deputy Commissioner in C.Dis:RAP:252/06-07. However, the Deputy Commissioner has also dismissed the appeal filed by him by affirming the order passed by the Committee and the Assistant Commissioner. Against aforesaid orders, K. Ramesh Achary approached the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (for brevity, 'KAT') in R.P.No.22/2009. However, the KAT has dismissed the revision petition filed by him and affirmed the order of the Deputy Commissioner. Hence, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51070 WP No. 58129 of 2017 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners so also the learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 4. 6. The primary contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the Committee, the Assistant Commissioner, the Deputy Commissioner and the KAT have totally erred while passing the impugned orders without conducting any enquiry in respect of rival claim made by K. Ramesh Achary in respect of subject land. The order passed by the Assistant Commissioner and the Committee clearly depicts that without considering Form No.53 filed by K. Ramesh Achary, those orders had been passed. He also contended that the portion of the subject land was granted in favour one Jainabi and the said order has been challenged by K. Ramesh Achary before this Court in W.P.No.18555/2012 and this Court vide order dated 02.01.2023 has set aside the order passed by the Committee, the Deputy Commissioner and the KAT remitted the matter to the Regularization Committee for - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51070 WP No. 58129 of 2017 fresh enquiry by considering the rival claim made by the K. Ramesh Achary in respect of subject lands. The order of the Co-ordinate Bench squarely applies to the facts and circumstance of this case and accordingly, he prays to allow the appeal and remit the matter back to the Committee. 7. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that despite granting sufficient opportunity to K. Ramesh Achary and his legal heirs, they have failed to prove their possession by placing relevant documents. In such circumstance, the Committee, the Assistant Commissioner, the Deputy Commissioner and the KAT have rightly dismissed the claim made by K. Ramesh Achary and his legal heirs. 8. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, so also perused the records made available before this Court. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51070 WP No. 58129 of 2017 9. On careful perusal of the impugned orders passed by the Committee and the Assistant Commissioner, it could be gathered that both the authorities have not considered the rival claim made by K. Ramesh Achary by conducting enquiry as contemplated under law. Nevertheless, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case cited supra by considering the similar orders passed by the authorities has remitted the matter to the Regularization Committee for fresh disposal by considering the rival claim and extending opportunity to the parties. 10. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered view that the matter requires reconsideration at the hands of the Regularization Committee by considering the rival claims of the petitioners and respondent No.5(a) to (k) by extending opportunity to them to place the relevant documents in support of their claim. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51070 WP No. 58129 of 2017 11. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 23.06.2017 passed by Karnataka Appellate Tribunal vide Annexure-A, order dated 29.12.2008 passed by the Deputy Commissioner vide Annexure-B, order dated 25.10.2006 passed by the Assistant Commissioner vide Annexure-C and Saguvali Chit dated 12.06.2003 issued by the Regularization Committee vide Annexure-D respectively are quashed. The matter is remitted to the Regularization Committee - respondent No.4 for fresh disposal in accordance with the above observations. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE CR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0