- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48111 WP No. 2199 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.2199 OF 2025 (LA-UDA) BETWEEN: SMT. RATHNAMMA W/O LATE BASAVAIAH URF BASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, RESIDING AT BELOW MENTIONED ADDRESS, #73, LALITHAADRIPURA VILLAGE, MYSORE, KARNATAKA-570028. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. KUSUMA M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSE AND URBAN, M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE – 560001. 2. MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JHANSI LAKSHMI BAI ROAD, MYSORE–570 005 BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JHANSI LAKSHMI BAI ROAD, MYSORE–570 005. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI HARISHA A.S., AGA FOR R-1; SRI T.P. VIVEKANANDA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 & R-3) Digitally signed by C K LATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48111 WP No. 2199 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION DATED 13.12.2006, BEARING NO.LAQ(4)CR31/2005-06 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AUTHORITY AT ANNEXURE-A TO THE WRIT PETITION IN SO FAR AS SCHEDULE PROPERTY BELONGING TO THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER The petitioner has called in question the preliminary notification dated 13.12.2006 issued under Section 17 of the Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act, 1987 (‘KUDA Act’ for short) insofar as it pertains to 0.09 guntas in Survey No.6/8 situated at Lalithaadripura Village, Varuna Hobli, Mysuru Taluk. 2. The petitioner claims ownership over 0.09 guntas in Survey No.6/8 Lalithaadripura Village, Varuna Hobli, Mysuru Taluk, which previously stood in the name of her father-in-law as per the RTCs. It is contended that during computerization, the RTC wrongly showed the land as Beelu. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48111 WP No. 2199 of 2025 3. On perusal of the material on record, it is evident that RTC entries have undergone change during computerization, and the petitioner has not approached the competent revenue authorities / Mysuru Urban Development Authority seeking correction of the land particulars in the revenue records before invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. The nature of the dispute raised requires factual verification and correction of entries at the hands of the revenue authorities. 4. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's claim regarding the alleged non-issuance of the final notification, this Court is of the opinion that the writ petition is premature. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent Revenue Authority for seeking necessary correction in the RTC and allied records, and thereafter, work out her remedies in accordance with law. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48111 WP No. 2199 of 2025 5. It is made clear that upon such correction, it is always open to the petitioner to avail an appropriate remedy, if any grievance survives, and no opinion is expressed on merits. Sd/- ______________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA MBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23