- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010359032026 NC: 2026:KHC:52480 WP No. 16252 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 16252 OF 2026 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT ZARINABEE W/O LATE BABAJAN. AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS. R/AT THIPLAPURA VILLAGE BHADRAVATHI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT PIN CODE-577 233. 2. SMT. B.B. ROSHAN D/O LATE BABAJAN AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/AT 7TH CROSS ANWAR COLONY BHADRAVATHI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT PIN CODE-577 301. 3. SMT ASHIABEE D/O LATE BABAJAN AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT THIPLAPURA VILLAGE BHADRAVATHI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT PIN CODE- 577 233. 4. SRI. SYED JEFRULLA S/O LATE BABAJAN AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT THIPLAPURA VILLAGE BHADRAVATHI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010359032026 NC: 2026:KHC:52480 WP No. 16252 of 2026 PIN CODE-577 233. 5. SRI. SYED ABRULLAH S/O LATE BABAJAN AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT THIPLAPURA VILLAGE BHADRAVATHI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT PIN CODE-577 233. 6. SRI. SYED IMRAN ULLAH S/O LATE BABAJAN AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT THIPLAPURA VILLAGE BHADRAVATHI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT PIN CODE-577 233. 7. SMT. FATHIMBEE D/O LATE BABAJAN AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT R.M.L. NAGARA SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT PIN CODE-577 233. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. DAYALU K.N..,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER SHIVAMOGGA SUB-DIVISION SHIVAMOGGA. PIN CODE-577 201. - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010359032026 NC: 2026:KHC:52480 WP No. 16252 of 2026 3. THE TAHSILDAR BHADRAVATHI TALUK BHADRAVATHI-577 301. 4. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR KUDLIGERE HOBLI BHADRAVATHI TALUK-577 233. 5. SRI. MARTHANDA RAO S/O SUBBA RAO AGED ABOUT 90 YEARS R/AT THIPLAPURA VILLAGE KUDLIGERE HOBLI BHADRAVATHI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT PIN-577233. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHAMANTH NAIK, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; SRI. A.C. BALARAJ .,ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY RESPONDENT NO.5 BEFORE THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SHIVAMOGGA SUB-DIVISION, IN PDA NO.13/2026/2026 UNDER SECTION 136(2) OF THE KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT CHALLENGING RRTCR NO.641/2024-25. E-794444 DATED 31.10.2025 I.E.. ANNEXURE-F AND ANNEXURE-J TO THE WRIT PETITION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010359032026 NC: 2026:KHC:52480 WP No. 16252 of 2026 ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioners are assailing the proceedings initiated by respondent No.5 in PDA No.13/2026 (Annexure-J) before the respondent No.2. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. It is the contention of the petitioners herein that the proceedings at Annexure-J is barred by res judicata as the respondent No.2 has already passed an order at Annexure-B and therefore sought for interference of this Court. 4. The said submission was opposed by the learned counsel representing the private respondent. 5. Having taken note of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the perusal of the order dated 27.09.2024 (Annexure-B) passed by respondent No.2 would indicate that the appeal preferred by the petitioners herein has been allowed and as such the matter was remanded to respondent No.3 to conduct spot inspection and thereafter take decision in the matter. Accordingly, the respondent No.2 - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010359032026 NC: 2026:KHC:52480 WP No. 16252 of 2026 has remitted the matter to respondent No.3 for fresh consideration. Thereafter, the respondent No.3 has passed an order dated 31.07.2025 (Annexure-C) and being aggrieved by the same, the respondent No.5 herein has challenged the said order passed by respondent No.3 before the respondent No.2 in Annexure-J to the writ petition. 6. In that view of the matter, as the fresh cause of action has arose after issuance of the memorandum dated 31.07.2025 (Annexure-C) passed by respondent No.3, I am of the view that the same cannot be considered as res judicata. In that view of the matter, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and same is dismissed accordingly. All pending IA's are dismissed accordingly. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE RU, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17