- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010628242026 NC: 2026:KHC:49600 WP No. 28848 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 28848 OF 2026 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, S/O. LATE RAMAPPA, 2. SRI. VENKATASWAMY AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, S/O. LATE RAMAPPA, 3. SRI. BHARATHRAJ AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O. NARAYANASWAMY, 4. SRI. ASHOKRAJ AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, S/O. NARAYANASWAMY, 5. SRI. CHANNARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, S/O. NARANAYAPPA, 6. SRI. RAMESH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, S/O. LATE KRISHNAPPA, Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010628242026 NC: 2026:KHC:49600 WP No. 28848 of 2026 7. SRI. VENKATESH GOWDA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, S/O. LATE ANJINAPPA, 8. SRI. N. RANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O. NARAYANAPPA, 9. SRI. NAGARAJ AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O. LATE NARAYANAPPA, ALL ARE RESIDENT OF HOOHALLI, AREHALLI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT-563101 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRABHU B. TUMBIGI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER APPELLATE AUTHORITY, KOLAR TALUK PANCHAYATH, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT-563101 2. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER ARAHALLI GRAMA PANCHAYATHI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT-563101 3. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, 4. SRI. SHAPHIULLA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010628242026 NC: 2026:KHC:49600 WP No. 28848 of 2026 S/O. PYARU SAB, 5. SMT. SHAKUNTHALA.N AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, C/O. CHALAPATHI.K, 6. SRI. IMTIYAZ KHAN AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, S/O. SUBHAN KHAN, 7. SRI. VENKATESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, S/O. VENKATARAMANAPPA, 8. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, W/O. LATE RANGAPPA, 9. SMT. SHAHINTHAJ AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, D/O. KHADEER KHAN, 10. SRI. MURALI KRISHNA.H.R AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, 11. SMT. GOWRAMMA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, D/O. VENKATESHAPPA, 12. VENKATARAMNA.M AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, 13. SMT. NARAYANAMMA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, W/O. LATE SANJEEVAPPA - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010628242026 NC: 2026:KHC:49600 WP No. 28848 of 2026 14. SRI. BHARATH.H.C AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, 15. SMT. VENKATAMMA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, W/O. DODDABEERAPPA, 16. SMT. VEENA.K.S AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, D/O. SANJEEVAPPA 17. SMT. MUNIRATHNAMMA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, W/O. THIMMAIAH, 18. SMT. VENKATALAKSHMAMMA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, W/O. LAKSHMAIAH, 19. SMT. KAMALAMMA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, D/O. NAGARAJAPPA, 20. SRI. DEVARAJ AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, S/O. GIDDAPPA, 21. SMT. ARUNAKSHI.K.A AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, D/O. ANJINAPPA, 22. SRI. ANIL KUMAR.R AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, S/O. LATE RANGAPPA 23. SRI. SAMPATH KUMAR - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010628242026 NC: 2026:KHC:49600 WP No. 28848 of 2026 AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, S/O. RAMAPPA, 24. SRI. RAGHAVENDRA.H.M AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, S/O. MUNIYAPPA, 25. SMT. NAGAVENI.T.N AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, 26. SRI. BABU.R AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 27. SMT. SHAMALAMMA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, W/O. MUNINARAYANASWAMY, 28. SMT. AKKAYAMMA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, D/O. MUNIHANUMAPPA, 29. SMT. NARAYANAMMA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, W/O. SRIRAMAPPA, 30. SRI. RAFIQ KHAN AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, S/O. BAKASH KHAN, 31. SMT. SHARADAMMA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, W/O. LATE MUNIRAJU, 32. SRI. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, S/O. VENKATARAMAPPA - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010628242026 NC: 2026:KHC:49600 WP No. 28848 of 2026 ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF HOOHALLI, AREHALLI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT-563101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.S.DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI BY SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 19.08.2026 PASSED IN - ..-21/2022 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT, PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO NOT TO CHANGE THE ENTRIES IN RESPECT OF PETITIONERS PROPERTIES I.E., 1ST PETITIONER AND 2ND PETITIONER PROPERTY SL.NO.337, PROPERTY SY.NO.311, EARLIER NO.251, SL.NO.338, PROPERTY NO.312, EARLIER NO.352, SL.NO.339, PROPERTY NO.313, EARLIER NO.253, 3RD PETITIONER SL.NO.356, PROPERTY NO.330, EARLIER NO.268, SL.NO.357, PROPERTY NO.331, EARLIER NO.269, 4TH PETITIONER SL.NO.358, PROPERTY NO.332, EARLIER NO.270, 5TH PETITIONER SL.NO.360, PROPERTY NO.334, SL.NO.362, PROPERTY NO.336, 6TH PETITIONER SL.NO.364, PROPERTY NO.338, 7TH PETITIONER SL.NO.367, PROPERTY NO.341, 8TH PETITIONER SL.NO.369, PROPERTY NO.343 AND 9TH PETITIONER SL.NO.372, PROPERTY NO.346 INCLUDING TAKING POSSESSION FROM THE PETITIONERS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010628242026 NC: 2026:KHC:49600 WP No. 28848 of 2026 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioners assert that they own properties in Hoohalli Village, Arahalli Grama Panchayath, Kolar Taluk and District and that they have been admitted to the revenue entries for the respective properties in the year 2016. The private respondents have filed an appeal with the first respondent under Section 269 of Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 calling in question the decision to admit the petitioners to such entries. The first respondent, allowing the appeal by the impugned Order dated 19.08.2026, has cancelled the revenue entries. 2. Mr. Prabhu B. Tumbigi, the learned counsel for the petitioners, submits [a] that this Court must intervene because the first respondent has entertained an appeal at the instance of the private respondents who cannot assert any interest in the petitioners’ properties, [b] that the petitioners have - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010628242026 NC: 2026:KHC:49600 WP No. 28848 of 2026 been issued with revenue entries in the year 2016 after due verification of all the records, and [c] that the first respondent, in any event, could not have allowed the appeal without assigning reasons. 3. Mr. M. S. Devaraju, the learned Standing counsel who accepts notice for the first and the second respondents, is heard for disposal of the petition on the third ground dispensing with notice to the private respondents. The first respondent’s impugned order in all its content, after reference to the details of the entries, reads only thus. ……………….ಌ൤ಗಳඝ౬ ರൿ౪ ಪല๭ൿ౪ , ಸದค ಜ෦ೕನඝ౬ ಛ౳ ಮ ಪಂೈ෵ൟ ವಶಃౙ ಪഷಯฤ ಪಂೈ෵ൟ ಅ෗ไൽ౫ ಅඌ౽ค, ಅರಹั౶ ಛ౳ ಮ ಪಂೈ෵ൟರವคಡ ๰೉๭, ಆංೕ๏๭ං.” 4. This Court finds force in the submission that if the petitioners have been admitted to the revenue entries in the year 2016 and they have offered taxes in all these years, it was incumbent upon the - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010628242026 NC: 2026:KHC:49600 WP No. 28848 of 2026 first respondent to reason the conclusion and such reasons ought to be cogent. The impugned Order must fail on the ground of failure to assign reasons for the outcome. If the order so fails, the just outcome in this petition with the private respondents yet to be served is to restore the proceedings for reconsideration calling upon the first respondent to ensure that the notice of the restored proceedings is caused to each of the private respondents and to the petitioners and pass just orders in the light of this Court's observation. Hence, the following. ORDER [A] The petition is allowed-in-part. [B] The first respondent's impugned Order dated 19.08.2026 [Annexure – A] is quashed restoring the proceedings to the first respondent. [C] The first respondent, upon receipt of a certified copy of this Order, shall ensure - 10 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010628242026 NC: 2026:KHC:49600 WP No. 28848 of 2026 fresh notice is issued to the private respondents and also to the petitioners and decide the case in the light of this Court's observations on the need to offer cogent reasons. [D] The petitioners are reserved with liberty to file a certified copy of this order with the first respondent within a week from the date of receipt thereof. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE RB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 13