- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53432 WP No. 18382 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 18382 OF 2022 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT SANTOSH BHUTRA S/O SRI RAMESHWARLAL BHUTRA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.9/12, 1ST CROSS GUPTA LAYOUT, BANNERGHATTA ROAD LAKKASANDRA BANGALORE - 560 030 … PETITIONER (BY SRI. K V SATISH., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BANGALORE SOUTH SUB DIVISION KANDAYA BHAVAN BANGALORE - 560 009 2. SRI M VENKATESH S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED MAJOR 3. SRI M RASMAIAH S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED MAJOR Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53432 WP No. 18382 of 2022 4. SRI MUNIVENKATAPPA SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HIS LR'S SRI NARAYANA S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA 5. SRI HARISH S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA 6. SRI MUNIYELLAPPA S/O MUNIVENKATAPPA AGED MAJOR 7. SMT. YALLAMMA W/O YELLAPPA AGED MAJOR 8. SRI CHINNAPPA S/O GUMMATAPPA AGED MAJOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 TO 8 ARE RESIDING AT SURAGAJAKKANAHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT - 562 106 9. THE TAHSILDAR ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT - 562 106 10. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT BANGALORE - 560 001 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53432 WP No. 18382 of 2022 11. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER SURAGAJAKKANAHALLI VILLAGE PANCHAYATH KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT - 562 106 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE, HCGP FOR R1, R9 AND R10; SRI NATARAJ BABA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R5; R7, R8 - SERVED; SRI M.S. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R11) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 22.04.2022 IN R.P.NO.450/2017 (ANNEXURE-A) OF THE R10 AND QUASH THE ORDER DTD 1.6.2016 PASSED BY THE R1 IN RA(A)/640/2014-15 (ANNEXURE-B) AND THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R9/TAHSILDAR U/S 136 (2) OF THE KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT, 1964 AGAINST THE M.R.NO.H-12/2013-14 ANNEXURE-C AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER The present petition has been filed calling in question the validity of the mutation effected in favour of private respondents in terms of the mutation - M.R.No.H- 12/2013-14 at Annexure-C. 2. The said order of the Tahsildar was assailed on various grounds including that the land itself having been - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53432 WP No. 18382 of 2022 converted as per the order of the Assistant Commissioner dated 21.12.2004, the revenue authorities did not have jurisdiction to entertain any application for change of mutation after such order of conversion. 3. The Assistant Commissioner as per the order at Annexure-B rejected the appeal and the said order has been confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner in Revision Petition No. 450/2017. Petitioner claims that on the basis of the sale deed and in light of land having been converted to non-agricultural purpose in the year 2003, she has got the katha transferred in her name before the Panchayat Authorities and relied on the documents produced at Annexure-G series issued by the Panchayat Development Officer. 4. The respondents on the other hand would contend that the petitioner has no lawful title and that the land was originally granted in favour of Muniyappa and there was no sale by Muniyappa or his legal - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53432 WP No. 18382 of 2022 representatives either to the vendor of the petitioner or to the petitioner and accordingly had sought for inheritance katha which was rightly effected in favour of the private respondents by the Tahsildar. 5. Learned High Court Government Pleader submits that once the land is converted to non-agricultural purpose, the revenue authorities cannot enter into any disputes relating to such mutation entry and the grievance regarding any entry existing after the date of the order of conversion can be made only before the Municipal Authority. 6. The fact that the subject matter of dispute of 13½ guntas comes within the purview of the order of conversion dated 21.12.2004 is not in dispute. Once the land is converted on 21.12.2004 the revenue authorities cannot entertain any dispute. Accordingly, the mutation entry at Annexure-C is one without jurisdiction and is set aside. The order at Annexure-B of the Assistant - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53432 WP No. 18382 of 2022 Commissioner and the order of the Deputy Commissioner at Annexure-A are also set aside. 7. The katha as on date stands in the name of the petitioner as is evidenced by the documents at Annexure- G series. However, noticing the contention of the private respondents, it is clarified that the katha standing in the name of the petitioner is kept open to be taken up before the Panchayat Authority. It is clarified that the Court has not entered into the merits of the claims of both parties and observations made are only on the jurisdictional aspect. All contentions of both sides are kept open. Liberty is reserved to the private respondents to challenge the katha effected in the name of the petitioner by the Panchayat Authorities, if circumstances are so made out, as per law. 8. The delay in filing the appeal must be construed liberally in light of the proceedings pending before this Court as well as revenue officials i.e., before the Deputy - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53432 WP No. 18382 of 2022 Commissioner and the Assistant Commissioner. In the interregnum, the petitioner not to create third party rights for a period of four weeks. Said protection is granted only as transitional relief leaving it open for the private respondents to approach the requisite authorities and obtain necessary orders as is permissible in law. 9. In light of the above, writ petition is disposed of. SD/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE VP