- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7519 WP No. 107930 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 107930 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SHANKRAPPA S/O. BASAVANNEPPA KUNNUR, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. KARJAGI, TQ: AND DIST: HAVERI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SURESH P. HUDEDAGADDI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, R/BY ITS SECRETARY TO REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU. 2. THE TAHSHILDAR/MEMBER SECRETARY, AKRAM SAKRAM SAMITI, HAVERI. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, HAVERI, DIST: HAVERI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.M. KHANNUR, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (a) ISSUE A WRIT OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 08.02.2022 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN LGL/AP/3/2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-F. (b) ISSUE A WRIT OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 14.12.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-D, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7519 WP No. 107930 of 2024 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) 1. The petitioner has filed this petition to quash the order dated 08.02.2022 passed by respondent No.3- Assistant Commissioner at Annexure-F and for a writ of mandamus. 2. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that, there is no order existing of the Tahasildar- respondent No.2 and since the petitioner had approached the Assistant Commissioner-respondent No.3, respondent No.3 has directed the Tahasildar to reconsider by virtue of the impugned order. The petitioner aggrieved by the said order is before this Court seeking to allow the petition, as there is jurisdictional error and there is no order in existence by the Tahasildar. 3. Per contra, learned AGA upon going through the records submits that, this petition would not be maintainable on the ground of alternative efficacious remedy available to - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7519 WP No. 107930 of 2024 the petitioner. It is contended by the learned AGA that the order impugned merely remands the matter back to the Tahasildar for reconsideration. If it is the case of the petitioner that, there is no such order, he can agitate the same before the Tahsildar and redress his grievance before respondent No.2 and if he is challenging the order of respondent No.3, then there is a remedy available under Rule 108-D(6) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules. Therefore, the petitioner is unable to satisfy this Court of there being any lack of jurisdiction in passing such an order. 4. Under the circumstances, the objections raised by the Registry with regard to maintainability of the petition is sustained. However, the present petition is not maintainable in view of alternative efficacious remedy available to the petitioner. 5. Accordingly, I pass the following order: The petition is dismissed. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach appropriate authority either the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7519 WP No. 107930 of 2024 Tahasildar or Additional Committee or challenge the said order if he is aggrieved and so advised, in accordance with law. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE kmv CT-MCK