- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010487492023 NC: 2026:KHC:38292 WP No. 20944 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 20944 OF 2023 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: 1. MR. ABDUL SHUKUR @ MOHAMMED SHUKUR AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS S/O. LATE MOHAMMED GHOUSE R/AT BIDANURU SHANIVARASANTHE HOBLI SOMWARPETE TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ADINARAYANA .M, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MULTISTORIED BUILDINGS BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KODAGU DISTRICT, MADIKERI-571 201. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MADIKERI SUB-DIVISION MADIKERI-571 201. 4. THE TAHSILDAR SOMAVARAPETE TALUK SOMWARPETE-571 236. Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010487492023 NC: 2026:KHC:38292 WP No. 20944 of 2023 5. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR SHANIVARASANTHE HOBLI SOMWARPETE TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT-571 236. 6. MR. MUSHEER AHAMMED S/O. LATE M. S. DASTAGIR AGED ABOUT YEARS R/AT HEMMANE VILLAGE GOPALAPURA POST SHANIVARASANTHE HOBLI SOMWARPETE TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT-571 236. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE .N, HCGP FOR R1 TO R5; SRI. N. RAVINDRANATH KAMATH, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHASHIDHAR, ADVOCATE FOR R6) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22.08.2023 IN R.P.NO.16/2022 PASSED BY THE R2 AT ANNEXURE-A AND TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 28.09.2021 IN RA.NO.350/2018-19 PASSED BY THE R3 AT ANNEXURE-B IN RESPECT OF LAND BEARING SY.NO.118/3 MEASURING 1.50 ACRES OUT OF WHICH 0.70 ACRES OF BIDARURU VILLAGE, SHANIVARASANTHE HOBLI, SOMWARPETE TALUK AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER In this petition, the petitioner is assailing the order dated 22.08.2023 in R.P.No.16/2022 (Annexure-A) passed - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010487492023 NC: 2026:KHC:38292 WP No. 20944 of 2023 by respondent No.2 and the order dated 28.09.2021 in R.A.No.350/2018-19 (Annexure-B) passed by respondent No.3, inter alia, sought for direction to the respondent - Authorities to restore the revenue entries in the name of the petitioner in respect of the subject land. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the registered deed dated 27.01.2003 has been created by the respondent No.6 herein, without the knowledge of the petitioner and the same is non est in the eye of law and therefore, contended that the impugned orders passed by the respondent - Authorities require to be interfered with by this Court in the present writ petition. 4. Sri.N.Ravindranath Kamath, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri.Sashidar, learned counsel for respondent No.6, contended that, the mutation entry has been effected based on the registered - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010487492023 NC: 2026:KHC:38292 WP No. 20944 of 2023 instrument and therefore, there is no infirmity or illegality in the orders passed by respondent - Authorities and accordingly, sought for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. Sri.Spoorthy Hegde N, learned High Court Government Pleader sought to justify the impugned orders. 6. In the light of the submissions made by the learned Counsels appearing for the parties and on careful consideration of the impugned orders passed by the respondent - Authorities at Annexures-A and B, it would indicate that the entry in the mutation has been made based on the registered document dated 27.01.2003, bearing Document No.1509/2002-03. In that view of the matter, as the respondent - Authorities have made entries based on the registered instrument in terms of Sections 128 and 129 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, the respondent - Authorities have rightly rejected the claim made by the petitioner and directed the - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010487492023 NC: 2026:KHC:38292 WP No. 20944 of 2023 petitioner herein to establish his right, title and interest, if any, in respect of the subject land before the competent Civil Court. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that no interference is called for in this petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5