- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32704 WP NO.21109 OF 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 01ST DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.21109 OF 2022 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: SMT. MUNIYAMMA D/O LATE SONAPPA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, OCC: HOMEMAKER AND AGRICULTURIST, R/AT CHIKKAJALA VILLAGE (AT POST), JALA HOBLI, YELAHANKA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH - 562 157. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R. SATISHCHANDRA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, 4TH FLOOR, GATE NO.3, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THASHILDAR YELAHANKA TALUK, YELAHANKA - 573 216. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION, KANDAYA BHAVANA, 2ND FLOOR, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009. 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32704 WP NO.21109 OF 2022 KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009. 5. SRI. RAVIKUMAR S/O LATE RAJANNA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/AT CHIKKAJALA VILLAGE (AT POST) JALA HOBLI, YELAHANKA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH - 562 157. 6. SRINIVASA SINCE DEAD, BY LRS. 6(a). GOWRAMMA W/O LATE SRINIVASA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. 6(b). JYOTHI D/O LATE SRINIVASA, W/O MUNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS. RESPONDENTS 6(a) AND 6(b) ARE R/AT ILTHORE VILLAGE, SADAHALLI POST, KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110. 7. C. KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE CHIKKAMARANNA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS. R/AT NO.222, CHKKAJALA VILLAGE, YELAHANKA TALUK, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT - 562 157. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4 SRI. KUMBAR V.F., ADVOCATE FOR R5, R6(a) AND (b) AND R7) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32704 WP NO.21109 OF 2022 THIS WRIT PETITON IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 26TH NOVEMBER, 2021 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4-DEPUTY COMMISSIONER IN REVISION PETITION NO.406/2016-17 VIDE ANNEXURE-G; DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO MUTATE THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER IN RTC IN RESPECT OF SURVEY NUMBER 39/3 OF CHIKKAJALA VILLAGE, JALA HOBLI, YALAHANKA TALUK TO AN EXTENT OF 2 GUNTAS OF LAND AS PER PARTITION DEED EXECUTED IN THE YEAR 1949-50; 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, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 26th November, 2021 (Annexure-G) passed by the respondent No.4-Deputy Commissioner in Revision Petition No.406/2016-17; inter alia sought for a direction to the respondent No.2 to mutate the name of the petitioner in RTC in respect of the subject land bearing Survey No.39/3 of Chikkajala Village, Jala Hobli, Yalahanka Taluk to an extent of 2 guntas as per the Partition Deed executed in the year-1949-50. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32704 WP NO.21109 OF 2022 2. Heard Sri. R. Satishchandra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Smt. B.P. Radha, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 4; and Sri. Kumbar V.F., learned counsel appearing for respondents 5, 6(a) and 6(b) and respondent No.7. 3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of finding recorded by the respondent No.4 in the impugned order, particularly, at paragraphs 4 and 7, it is forthcoming that, M.R.No.4/1994-95 was made based on the Panchayathi Palupatti dated 20th August, 1992 in respect of the subject land. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is also a legal heir of the original propositus Munishammappa and therefore, claiming 2 guntas in the subject land. 4. Taking into consideration the fact that the mutation has been made in M.R.No.4/1994-95 based on the Panchayathi Palupatti dated 20th August, 1992, I am of the view that, in the event, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the same, it is open for the petitioner to establish her right over the subject land in the competent Civil Court. Therefore, reserving liberty to the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32704 WP NO.21109 OF 2022 petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court, writ petition is dismissed. 5. It is made clear that, liberty is reserved for the petitioner to approach the competent authority, after the right of the parties over the subject land is crystallised before the Civil Court. SD/- (E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49