- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1521 WP No. 33353 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 33353 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: SRI. G. SATHYANARAYANA S/O SRI. M.T. GOPALAKRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT HIRANDAHALLI VILLAGE, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 049. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SUBRAMANYA S. UPASANA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SPECIAL TAHASILDHAR OFFICE OF THE TAHASILDHAR, BANGALORE EAST TLAUK, K.R. PURA, BANGALORE - 560 036. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR, AGA) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT OF THE R-2 DATED 24.09.2025, BEARING NO. Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1521 WP No. 33353 of 2025 RRT(B) CR/258/2025-26 AT ANNX-F WITH RESPECT TO SCHEDULE PROPERTY AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for both the respondents. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned endorsement at Annexure-F dated 24.09.2025 issued by the Special Tahsildar, Bengaluru East Taluk, K.R.Puram, directing the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 before the Assistant Commissioner if the petitioner wants to have his name entered in the revenue records. 3. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that there is no infirmity in the impugned endorsement. The petitioner is seeking entry of his name pursuant to a registered sale deed dated 25.06.2001. However, the Tahsildar has found that the person who has executed the sale deed in favour of the petitioner is not the kathedar and therefore, the Tahsildar - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1521 WP No. 33353 of 2025 has directed the petitioner to approach the Assistant Commissioner. 4. There is substance in the submission made by the learned Additional Government Advocate. If there is a dispute regarding the person who has executed the sale deed and he has not been a kathedar and nevertheless, the petitioner is insisting on his name being entered in the revenue records, the matter has to be considered at the hands of the Assistant Commissioner in a duly constituted appeal under Section 136(2) of the Act. The Assistant Commissioner will issue notice to all concerned, hear them and thereafter, pass appropriate orders. In that view of the matter, their being no substance in the writ petition, the writ petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE rv List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13