Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 19810 (KAR)

BASAVARAJU KN v. THE STATE OF KARNTAKA

WP/15188/2026 · 2026-06-05

E S Indiresh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26941 WP No. 15188 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 05TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.15188 OF 2026 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. BASAVARAJU K.N. S/O NANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT KODLAHALLI VILLAGE BALAVANAHALLI HOBLI, KORATAGERE TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 121. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. M.B. CHANDRA CHOODA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNTAKA DEPARTMENT OF LAND REVENUE, M.S.BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, TUMAKURU DISTRICT, TUMAKURU-572201, TUMAKURU DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHASILDAR, GUBBI TALUK, GUBBI-TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572216. Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26941 WP No. 15188 of 2026 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH RESPONDENT THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 01.04.2026 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, TUMAKURU DISTRICT, TUMAKURU, BEARING NO.TMKDC/ALN/ALGU/1/2026(E-1022788) VIDE ANNEXURE-H IN RESPECT OF THE LAND BEARING SY.NO.101/2 MEASURING 1 ACRE 22 GUNTAS, SITUATED AT HERUR VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT, BY ISSUE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the Endorsement dated 01.04.2026 produced at Annexure-H, issued by respondent No. 2. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26941 WP No. 15188 of 2026 3. It is noticed that the impugned endorsement has been issued by respondent No.2 rejecting the application submitted by the petitioner seeking change of land use. 4. In view of the fact that the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition. 5. Accordingly, reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal and avail the remedy available under law, the writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SB:List No.: 1 Sl No.: 77