Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 23036 (KAR)

SRI FAYAZ M R v. THE STATE OF KARNTAKA

WP/15111/2026 · 2026-06-17

E S Indiresh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29712 WP NO.15111 OF 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.15111 OF 2026 (KLR-REG) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. FAYAZ M.R. S/O LATE RASHEED KHAN, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT KUDIGE VILLAGE AND POST, SOMAVARAPET TALUK, KODAGU - 591 232. 2. SMT. FARZANA M.R. D/O LATE RASHEED KHAN, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT KUDIGE VILLAGE AND POST, SOMAVARAPET TALUK, KODAGU - 591 232. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. NANJUNDA SWAMY N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNTAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BENGALURU - 560 001. REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THASILDAR SOMWARPET TALUK, SECRETARY, THE REGULARIZATION COMMITTEE, SOMWARPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 236. Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29712 WP NO.15111 OF 2026 3. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR REVENUE OFFICER, SUNTI KOPPA HOBLI, SOMWARPET TALUK, SOMWARPET, KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 236. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO CONSIDER AND CONCLUDE THE PROCEEDINGS RELATING TO REGULARIZATION OF THE LANDS SHOWN IN THE SCHEDULE OF THE WRIT PETITION IN CASE NO.150/1992-93 AND FORM NO.53 FILED BY THE MOTHER OF THE PETITIONERS VIDE ANNEXURES 'A' AND 'B' RESPECTIVELY; DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 NOT TO DISPOSSESS THE PETITIONERS FROM THE LAND SHOWN IN THE SCHEDULE TILL THE CONCLUSION OF THE PROCEEDINGS RELATING TO REGULARIZATION AS PER THE FORM NO.53 FILED BY THE MOTHER OF THE PETITIONERS; AND ETC. 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 In this petition, petitioners are seeking direction to the respondent No.1 to consider the application filed by the Mother of petitioners in Form No.53 and conclude the proceedings relating to the Regularisation of the schedule land in favour of the petitioners. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29712 WP NO.15111 OF 2026 2. Heard Sri. Nanjunda Swamy N., learned counsel appearing for petitioners and Smt. B.P. Radha, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents. 3. Sri. Nanjunda Swamy N., learned counsel appearing for petitioners submitted that, though the application is being filed by the mother of petitioners seeking regularisation of the land, the same has not been considered by the respondents despite there is an order of this Court in Writ Petition No.35818 of 2011, directing the respondent No.2 herein to consider the issue for regularisation of schedule land in favour of petitioners. Accordingly, he sought for interference of this Court. 4. Per contra, Smt. B.P. Radha, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents, by referring to the entries mentioned in Column No.11 of the RTC Extract produced at Annexure-D1, submitted that the land in question has been reserved under Section 71 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 in favour of the Executive Officer, Kodagu Zilla Panchayat, Madikeri for formation of 'Navagrama'. Accordingly, she sought for dismissal of writ petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29712 WP NO.15111 OF 2026 5. In the light of submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, on careful consideration of the order dated 13th March, 2012 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.35818 of 2011, I am of the considered opinion that, it is the duty of the respondent No.2-Tahsildar to consider the application made by the mother of petitioners. Accordingly, respondent No.2-Tahsildar is directed to consider the application made by the mother of petitioners in Form No.53 (Annexure-B) for regularisation of land in question and intimate the outcome of the same to the petitioners, within an outer limit of four months from the date of receipt of this order. With this observation, writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- (E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 71