- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3220 WP No. 26005 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 26005 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: N C VENKATARAMANAPPA S/O VENKATASHAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, R/AT S-1, SECOND FLOOR, FORTUNE ICON APARTMENT, SAHAKARANAGAR F BLOCK, BENGALURU- 560092. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. THEJAS M R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, HUDSON CIRCLE, BENGALURU 560 002 2. ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER, BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, GANDHINAGAR DIVISION, BENGALURU-560009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SUMANA BALIGA M., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3220 WP No. 26005 of 2025 REPRESENTATION DATED 06.09.2024 MADE BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE RESPONDENT NO.2 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-F AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. The Petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs; (a) Issue writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to consider representation dated 06.09.2024 made by the petitioners to the Respondent No.2 produced at Annexure-F. (b) Further to direct the Respondents to issue computerized BBMP property tax receipts by entering the name of the Petitioner with respect to the land measuring to an extent of 13 Guntas bearing Survey No. 27/1, situated in Bygemuddehalli, Sayora Lane, Gandhinagar Division, Bangalore and (c) Issue any other writ or direction or order as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case, by allowing this writ petition with exemplary cost, in the interest of justice and equity. 2. The Petitioner purchased 13 guntas of land in Sy.No.27/1 situated at Bygemuddehalli, Sayora Lane, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3220 WP No. 26005 of 2025 Gandhinagar Division, Bangalore, from one Smt.R. Chowdamma under a registered sale deed dated 11.02.2013. 3. In pursuance thereto, ‘B’ katha was issued in the name of the Petitioner on 06.01.2016. Though the Petitioner has been making payment of necessary taxes, tax paid receipt continues to reflect the name of the vendor of the Petitioner. In this regard, the Petitioner has submitted a representation on 06.09.2024 in terms of Annexure-F, which has not been acted upon. In that background, the Petitioner has approached this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs. 4. A perusal of the documents indicates that Smt.R.Chowdamma acquired the property in question under a decree during the course of execution and Execution Petition No.1069/2009. The judgment debtor, being P. Rathnam, represented by his legal - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3220 WP No. 26005 of 2025 representatives, Smt. Pushpa, Smt. Uma and Sri. Suresh. 5. It is thus evident that the name reflected in the tax paid receipts is that of Smt. Pushpa, who is none other than the wife of Sri P. Rathnam, the judgment debtor in the aforesaid execution proceedings. At the same time, the assessment and khata stand in the name of the Petitioner. Upon execution of the registered sale deed in favour of the Petitioner, all consequential municipal records, including tax paid receipts, are required to reflect the Petitioner’s name. It is inexplicable as to how the khata could stand in the name of the Petitioner while the tax paid receipts continue to reflect the name of a third party. 6. The contention of the learned counsel for the respondents that the discrepancy is attributable to a “technical glitch” cannot be accepted. Any such technical glitch could not have selectively affected only the name printed on the tax paid receipts, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3220 WP No. 26005 of 2025 without having a corresponding impact on the khata certificate and assessment records maintained by the respondents. 7. The Petitioner is, therefore, placed in an anomalous situation where the khata stands in his name, while the tax paid receipts stand in the name of another. It is imperative that all municipal records relating to the Petitioner’s property uniformly and consistently reflect the Petitioner as the owner. General Directions: 8. Having regard to the nature of the discrepancy noticed in the present case, and in furtherance of the statutory duties cast upon the municipal authority under the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976, the respondents shall undertake a verification exercise to ensure internal consistency across municipal records maintained by them. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3220 WP No. 26005 of 2025 9. Such verification shall be confined to comparison and reconciliation of records maintained under the Act and the Rules, including the khata register, assessment register, demand register, tax payment records, property extracts, and corresponding electronic records maintained in municipal systems, solely for the purpose of identifying apparent discrepancies in ownership particulars or other material entries. 10. Wherever discrepancies are noticed during such exercise, the competent authority shall flag the same and take corrective action in accordance with law, including rectification of clerical or administrative errors, synchronisation of physical and electronic records, cancellation or supersession of incorrect receipts or extracts, and issuance of corrected documents reflecting accurate particulars by issuing necessary notices to the concerned. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3220 WP No. 26005 of 2025 11. In the event discrepancies are found to be recurring or systemic in nature, the respondents shall take appropriate remedial and preventive measures, including issuance of administrative instructions or standard operating procedures to officers concerned, consistent with the provisions of the law applicable, so as to minimise recurrence and ensure uniformity. 12. Respondent No.1 shall file a compliance affidavit before this Court within a period of eight weeks, indicating in brief the nature and scope of the verification undertaken and the general remedial measures initiated. The affidavit shall be confined to systemic compliance and shall not require disclosure of individual property details. 13. It is clarified that the directions issued herein are in furtherance of the respondents’ existing statutory obligations to maintain accurate, consistent, and reliable municipal records. The respondents shall retain full liberty to exercise their statutory powers - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3220 WP No. 26005 of 2025 and discretion in accordance with law, subject to compliance with the directions issued herein. 14. In that view of the matter, the representation not having been acted upon, I pass the following: ORDER i) Writ petition is allowed. ii) A mandamus is issued. Respondents are directed to consider the representation dated 06.09.2024 made by the Petitioner and pass necessary orders within 30 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. iii) Though the above matter is disposed relist on 12.03.2026 for reporting compliance. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE KTY/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36