- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:259 WP No. 7223 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 7223 OF 2022 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI.NAGARAJU K R S/O RAMANNA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT KALACHAR BIDI KRS AGRAHARA, KUNIGAL TOWN KASABA TALUK TUMKUR-572 221. 2. SRI. MOHAN K S/O KARIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT 48/1, MANIKYANAHALLI POST MELUKOTE HOBLI MANIKYANAHALLI, PANDAVAPURA MANDYA-571 434. 3. SRI NARAYANA G., S/O GANGARASAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT 29-E-2, 4TH CROSS, JADE MUNESHWARA BEEDI KEMPAMMA DEVI NAGARA, SHIVANAPURA COLONY SHIVANAPURA, BENGALURU NORTH BENGALURU-562 123. 4. SRI RAJU H.C., S/O LATE CHIKKASIDDAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:259 WP No. 7223 of 2022 R/AT HONNUDIKE HONNUDIKE, TUMKUR-572 122. 5. SRI SHIVAKUMARA S.M., S/O MAHADEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, SANGAPURA SOMANAHALLI POST, AKKI HEBBALU HOBLI K R PETE TALUK MANDYA-571 401. 6. SHRI RAMESH B.T., S/O SAVITHRAMMA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT BARADI VILLAGE MANDIGERE POST NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-561 123. 7. SRI KHURRAM S/O LATE MOHAMMED NIJAM AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, C/O JAMSHEED PASHA NO.2965, AGRAHARA BEEDHI K R PETE TALUK MANDYA-571 426. 8. SHRI MAHADEVA S/O PAPEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS BUKANAKUPPE, K R PETE TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571 812. 9. SRI THIRUMALE GOWDA S/O CHANNAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/A CHIKKABELAMANGALA DODDABELAMANGALA POST DODDABALLAPURA BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-561 203. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:259 WP No. 7223 of 2022 10. SHRI H M MANJUNATH S/O MALLESHAIAH AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/A HARTHI VILLAGE MAGADI TALUK RAMNAGARA DISTRICT-562 120. 11. SRI RAVIKIRTHI T H S/O HANUMANTHARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/A NO.16 ANDRAHALLI MAIN ROAD NEAR SHANESHWARA TEMPLE RAMESHWARA NAGARA KARIHOBANAHALLI BENGALURU-560 058. 12. SHRI NARASIMHAMURTHY K.R., S/O RANGASWAMY AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/A GUNDJANEYASWAMY BEEDI KORATAGERE TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 129. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRAKASH T. HEBBAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 5TH FLOOR, M.S. BUILDING, DR B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560 001 REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE COMMISSIONER SURVEY SETTLEMENT AND LAND RECORDS K R CIRCLE BENGALURU-560 001. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:259 WP No. 7223 of 2022 3. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR SURVEY SETTLEMENT AND LAND RECORDS K R CIRCLE BENGALURU-560 001. 4. THE PRINCIPAL SURVEY SETTLEMENT TRAINING INSTITUTE HADAJANA VILLAGE MYSURU-571 311. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS FROM THE R-2 AND 4, PURSUE THE SAME AND GRANT THE FOLLOWING RELIEFS TO THE PETITIONERS AS AGAINST THE RESPONDENTS: QUASH THE ORDER DATED 03.03.2022 PASSED BY THE R-2 COMMISSIONER AT ANNEXURE-A AND ALSO THE COMMUNICATION DATED 28.03.2021 ISSUED BY THE R-4 PRINCIPAL DIRECTING THE PETITIONERS TO APPEAR IN THE EXAMINATION SCHEDULED TO BE HELD ON 05.04.2022 AND 06.04.2022 AS PER ANNEXURE-B. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER Petitioners who have been issued licence under Rule 46-C of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966 are before this Court seeking following relief: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:259 WP No. 7223 of 2022 "Quash the order bearing No.SSLR-13011/120/2021/PMU dated 03.03.2022 passed by the respondent No.2- commissioner at Annexure-A and also the communication dated 28.03.2021 issued by the respondent No.4 - principal directing the petitioners to appear in the examination scheduled to be held on 05.04.2022 and 06.04.2022 as per Annexure-B." 2. By Annexure-A, respondent No.2-Commissioner in furtherance to power conferred under Rule 46 of Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as "Rules, 1966") has proposed to conduct Tantrika Samarthya Parikshya/ Technical competency test to the licence holders as that of the petitioners. 3. Annexure-B is the Memorandum calling upon the petitioners to appear for the said test proposed to be held on 05.04.2022 and 06.04.2022 between 9.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners assailing these two communications at Annexures-A and B and referring to provisions of Rule 46-A of Rules, 1966 vehemently submits that the petitioners having required qualification, experience and the age eligibility were issued with a licence in the year 2002 and their licence have been periodically renewed and they have acquired rich experience in the field of survey. As such - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:259 WP No. 7223 of 2022 compelling the petitioners to undergo a technical competency test as sought to be done vide impugned communications is arbitrary. He further submits that there is every possibility that respondent authorities would decline to renew the licence under the garb of petitioners not taking up the test, which would cause prejudice apart from violating their fundamental rights. Hence seeks for allowing of the petition. 5. Learned Additional Government advocate on the other hand submits that the issuance of licence and renewal of licence are two different aspects. Renewal of licence is subject to provisions contained under Rule 46-C which also provides for satisfaction of the concerned authority regarding the service rendered by the licence holders and also evaluation mechanism as may be prescribed by the department. She submits, considering the modern technology required for the purpose of conducting effective survey, the department has evolved to conduct Technical competency test which is implicit under Rule 46-C. Therefore, it cannot be termed as arbitrary. The Learned Additional Government advocate further submitted that requirement of subject evaluation and satisfaction was introduced by an amendment effective from 12.09.2013 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:259 WP No. 7223 of 2022 whereas the petitioners were originally issued licence much prior to such provision. Hence, seeks for dismissal of the petition. 6. Heard and perused the records. 7. There is no dispute of the fact that petitioners have been issued with the licence in terms of Rule 46-A of Rules, 1966 which presupposes petitioners having acquired or possessed required qualification, experience and age as contemplated thereunder. 8. Rule 46-C of Rules, 1966 reads as under: "46-C. Licence. - Licence shall be issued by the Commissioner/Director, Survey Settlement and Land Records, Bangalore to the successful candidates in the examination conducted by Department of Survey, Settlement and Land Records on payment of licence fees as notified by the Commissioner/Director, Survey Settlement and Land Records. The licence shall be for a period of 3 years subject to renewal. Period of licence once issued shall be extended by renewal on an application to be made by the licence holder within one month from the date of expiry of period of licence, before the Deputy Director of Land Records of the respective Districts along with the fee as notified by the Commissioner/Director, Survey Settlement and Land Records. Renewal of licence shall be subject to satisfactory service rendered by the licensed surveyor which is assessed by the concerned Deputy Director of Land Records of the District or through continuous evaluation mechanism prescribed by the Department. If the performance at any time is below the minimum - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:259 WP No. 7223 of 2022 standard fixed by the Department, Department would subject such licensed Surveyor to further training for a period of not less than 3 months and after successful completion of the training, the Commissioner/Director, Survey Settlement and Land Records shall decide to renew the licence or not, or to recover the financial loss caused to the applicants". 9. Perusal of the aforesaid provision indicate that licence to be issued to the surveyor is valid for a period of three years subject to renewal. Renewal of licence is further subject to the satisfaction regarding service rendered by the licensed surveyor, by the concerned Deputy Director of Land Records of the District and/or through continuous evaluation mechanism prescribed by the department. Thus, the language employed under the provision indicate vide discretionary power being vested with the authority to be exercised while renewing the licence, one of which is continuous evaluation mechanism. 10. In the light of the aforesaid provision, Annexure- A issued by the respondent No.2 indicate that a technical competency test is sought to be conducted calling upon the petitioners to undergo such test for the purpose of renewal of the licence. There cannot be any dispute to the fact that with the change of time and advancement of technology, petitioners - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:259 WP No. 7223 of 2022 though claim to have had experience sufficient enough to be granted licence in the year 2002 cannot deny or refuse to undergo the technical competency test sought to be conducted by the respondent authorities which would only augment and further the object as contemplated under the provisions. 11. As rightly pointed out by the learned Government Advocate, evaluation mechanism including one as sought to be done as per Annexures- A and B i.e., conducting of technical competency test is implicit under Rule 46-C as extracted above. Conducting of such tests is clearly traceable to the said provision and therefore cannot be found to be arbitrary. Therefore petition lacks merit. 12. At this juncture, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that since the date of conducting of the tests were scheduled to be held on 05.04.2022 and 06.04.2022, petitioners did not appear for the said tests in view of the pendency of the petition. Therefore he submits that respondent authorities may be directed to provide one more opportunity to the petitioners to undergo the technical - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:259 WP No. 7223 of 2022 competency test with prior intimation of the date and the place of the test. 13. This Court by order dated 04.04.2022 while considering the submission made by the learned counsel for petitioners had reserved liberty to respondents to proceed with the technical competency test in terms of the official memorandum at Annexure-B dated 28.03.2021. However directed that it shall not announce the results or shall not take any further action without the permission of the Court. It is submitted that the petitioners have not participated in the said technical competency test as directed by this Court. Notwithstanding the same learned AGA on instruction submits that if petitioners make a fresh representation seeking permission/liberty to take up the technical competency test as proposed in Annexure-B, they would be provided an opportunity. 14. Learned Additional Government Advocate further submits that required technical competency tests will be conducted, date and venue of the same will be intimated to the petitioners well in advance. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:259 WP No. 7223 of 2022 15. Submission taken on record. In that view of the matter, petition is disposed of. Petitioners are at liberty to make necessary representation in this regard within a period of fifteen(15) days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In that event, the respondent authority shall fix the date and venue enabling the petitioners to take up technical competency test and intimate the petitioners in writing. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE SBN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27