Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 16570 (KAR)

SMT JAYALAKSHMAMMA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/941/2026 · 2026-02-17

R Devdas

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9512 WP No. 941 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 941 OF 2026 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SMT JAYALAKSHMAMMA W/O CHIKKANARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT OBALAHALLI VILLAGE, NANDAGUDI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. PINCODE-562 114 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. A.G NAGARAJA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT, REPTD. BY IT SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560 001. Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9512 WP No. 941 of 2026 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BEERASANDRA, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. PINCODE-562 11.0 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DODDABALLAPUR SUB-DIVISION DODDABALLAPURA, PINCODE-561 203 4. THE TAHASILDAR HOSAKOTE TALUK, HOSAKOTE TOWN -562 114 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS BY DIRECTING THE 4TH RESPONDENT/TAHASILDAR TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER ON 28/11/1998 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-F AND G FOR REGULARIZATION OF UN- AUTHORIZED CULTIVATION. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9512 WP No. 941 of 2026 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER 1. Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for the respondents. 2. It is the contention of the petitioner that she has filed an application in Form No.53 on 28.11.1998 seeking regularization of unauthorized occupation of 2 acres of land in Sy.No.50 of Gullenahalli Village, Nandagudi Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District. However, the respondent - authorities have not considered the application till date and no orders are passed. Hence, the prayer in the petition is to direct the respondents to consider the said application. 3. Having regard to the contentions raised in the writ petition and submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that respondent No.4-Tahsildar was duty bound to place the application filed by the petitioner before the Committee for - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9512 WP No. 941 of 2026 Regularization of Unauthorized Occupation and the Committee was also duty bound to consider the application and pass necessary orders. 4. Consequently, the writ petition stands disposed of with a specific direction to respondent No.4 - Tahsildar, Hosakote Taluk, to verify from the records as to whether such an application filed by the petitioner is pending consideration. If it is found that such an application was indeed filed by the petitioner in the year 1998 and the application is yet to be considered, the respondent- Tahsildar is directed to place the application before the Committee, along with his recommendation within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the Committee shall consider the application and pass necessary orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months thereafter. Ordered accordingly. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9512 WP No. 941 of 2026 Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today. SD/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE PKS/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2