- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32360 WP No. 25169 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 25169 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SMT LAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE CHANNE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS R/O NETTEKERE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, BANTENAHALLI POST, BELUR TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT – 573115. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. M. JAGANNATH ALVA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HASSAN DISTRICT HASSAN – 573201 3. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER SAKALESHPURA SUB-DIVISION, SAKALESHPURA HASSAN DISTRICT – 573134. 4. THE TAHSILDAR BELUR TALUK, BELUR Digitally signed by DHARMALINGAM Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32360 WP No. 25169 of 2025 HASSAN DISTRICT - 573115 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH., AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT NO.N.C.R.04/24-25 DATED 18.12.2024 ISSUED BY THE THAHSILDAR BELUR TALUK/RESPONDENT NO.4 AND THEREBY REFUSING TO GRANT THE LAND IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF SCHEDULE PROPERTY WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE –A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for all the respondents. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s husband late Sri Channe Gowda had filed an application in Form No.53 seeking regularization of unauthorised occupation of 3 acres 15 guntas of land in Survey No.82 of Nettekere Village, Kasaba Hobli, Belur - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32360 WP No. 25169 of 2025 Taluk, Hassan District, on 05.07.1991. However, the said lands were granted to some other person and the petitioner's husband being aggrieved of such an action, he committed suicide on 08.12.2021 . The petitioner however raised a challenge to the grant made in favour of the other person and orders were passed by the Assistant Commissioner, as found at Annexure-E cancelling the grant. Thereafter, the petitioner approached this Court in W.P.No.24637/2022 seeking directions to the Tahasildar and the committee to reconsider the application filed by the petitioner’s husband, since the said land was available for grant. This Court passed orders on 10.09.2024, while directing the Deputy Commissioner to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner gave a representation to the Deputy Commissioner on 30.09.2024 enclosing a copy of the order passed in W.P.No.24637/2022. The Tahasildar has issued the impugned endorsement at Annexure-A dated 18.12.2024 rejecting the application on the ground that - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32360 WP No. 25169 of 2025 the lands are within the prohibited distance of 3 kilometers from the boundary of the town municipality. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when admittedly the same lands were granted in favour of the other person having regard to the applications filed in the year 1991, when the prohibition as found now was not applicable having regard to the geographical boundary of the town municipality. The Tahasildar could not have rejected the application on the same ground. 4. This Court in the case of Sri Ashwathappa and Others /vs./ State of Karnataka and Others in W.P.No.2411/2022, has held that the distance has to be measured having regard to the geographical boundary of the municipality, corporation or the local authority bearing in mind the date of the application and the geographical boundary of the local authority. In the present case when admittedly the same lands were granted in favour of some other person, it would clearly indicate that the lands in - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32360 WP No. 25169 of 2025 question were not within the prohibited distance as on the date when the application was filed by the applicant. In that view of the matter, the impugned endorsement could not have been issued by the Tahasildar rejecting the application on the ground that the land is within the prohibited distance. 5. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned endorsement at Annexure-A dated 18.12.2024 issued by the Tahasildar, Belur Taluk, Belur, is hereby quashed and set aside. The Tahasildrar, Belur Taluk is hereby directed to place the application of the petitioner before the Committee for regularization of unauthorized occupation within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Committee shall thereafter proceed to pass necessary orders to grant the lands in favour of the petitioner, without again rejecting the application on the ground that the land is within the prohibited distance. The Committee shall pass necessary orders as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32360 WP No. 25169 of 2025 a period of two months from the date when the application is placed before the Committee. Ordered accordingly. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE KLY CT: JL