- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25680 WP No. 6667 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.6667 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. CHANDRAMMA W/O. C. HUCHEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS RESIDING AT CHIKKA KARDE VILLAGE, DANDIGANAHALLI HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SURENDRA KUMAR N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER., HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, HASSAN SUB DIVISION, HASSAN. 3. THE TAHASILDAR CHANNARAYAPATHA TALUK,. CHANNARAYAPATNA. 4. SMT. JAYAMMA W/O. H.A. BOREGOWDA, AGED : MAJOR RESIDING AT CHIKKA KARDE VILLAGE, DANDIGANAHALLI HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK, Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25680 WP No. 6667 of 2025 HASSAN DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SIDDHARTH BABURAO, AGA FOR R1 TO R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER/RESPONDENT NO.1 IN R.P NO.4/2021-22 DATED 23.01.2024 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D AND SO ALSO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 ASSISTANT IN RA NO. 18/2002-03 DATED 26.08.2005 PRODUCED AT ANNX-C. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Sri. Siddarth Baburao, learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondents 1 to 3. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the order dated 23.01.2024 in R.P.No. 4 of 2021-22 (Annexure-D) passed by respondent No.1- Deputy Commissioner and also - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25680 WP No. 6667 of 2025 order dated 26.08.2005 in RA No.18 of 2002-2003 passed by respondent No.2- Assistant Commissioner (Annexure- C). 4. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is noted that, both the petitioner and respondent No.4 are claiming grant in respect of the subject land. In that view of the rival claims, respondent No.2 has remanded the matter to the respondent No.3 with a direction to examine the case of both parties and take an appropriate decision after verifying the original records available in their office. This order of remand passed by respondent No.2 has been confirmed by respondent No.1– Deputy Commissioner, by impugned order dated 23.01.2024. Since order of remand has been made by respondent No.2 and confirmed by respondent No.1 to re-consider the case of the parties, afresh upon verification of the original records, no grounds are made out for interference by this Court in the present writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22