- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:184 WP No. 107050 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 107050 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: SMT. GEETABAI W/O. GOVINDACHARYA KOLLI, AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, NEAR AMBHABHAVANI TEMPLE, HANUMASAGAR-583227, TQ: KUSHTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHRIHARSH A.NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION, ADMINISTRATIVE BHAVAN, KOPPAL DISTRICT-583277. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER REVENUE DIVISION, DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE BHAVAN, DISTRICT KOPPAL-583231. 3. THE TAHASILDAR KUSHTAGI TALUKA, KUSHTAGI-583277. 4. THE REVENUE OFFICER HANAMANAL, KUSHTAGI TALUKA, DISTRICT: KOPPAL-583227. 5. THE VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT HABALAKATTI, KUSHTAGI TALUKA, MANJANNA E Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2026.01.14 10:53:21 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:184 WP No. 107050 of 2025 KOPPAL DISTRICT-583227. 6. YELLAPPA S/O. SHANMUKHAPPA GADDI AGE: 58 YEARS,OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. JAGIRGUDADUR-583277, TQ: KUSHTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL. 7. ANANTRAO S/O. MUDDURAO KHONAPUR AGE: 60 YEARS,OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. JAGIRGUDADUR-583277, TQ: KUSHTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL. 8. SHIVARUDRAPPA S/O. SHARAANAPPA ANGADI AGE: 67 YEARS,OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. JAGIRGUDADUR-583277, TQ: KUSHTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL. 9. PARASAPPA S/O. AYYAPPA NIDAGUND AGE: 61 YEARS,OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. JAGIRGUDADUR-583277, TQ: KUSHTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL. 10. HANAMAPPA S/O. GOOLAPPA MUSHEEGERI AGE: 60 YEARS,OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. JAGIRGUDADUR-583277, TQ: KUSHTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL. 11. MAHANTESH S/O. CHANNAPPA VATTI AGE: 46 YEARS,OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. JAGIRGUDADUR-583277, TQ: KUSHTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL. 12. FAKIRGOUDA S/O. DYAMANAGOUDA POLICE PATIL, AGE: 56 YEARS,OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. JAGIRGUDADUR-583277, TQ: KUSHTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:184 WP No. 107050 of 2025 13. HANAMAPPA S/O. SHIVANANDAPPA KAREKANAKANAKAPPANAVAR, AGE: 39 YEARS,OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. JAGIRGUDADUR-583277, TQ: KUSHTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL. 14. SHARANAPPA S/O. PARASAPPA MALAGITTI AGE: 34 YEARS,OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. JAGIRGUDADUR-583277, TQ: KUSHTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL. 15. SHARANAPPA S/O. HANAMAPPA NEELAGUND AGE: 59 YEARS,OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. JAGIRGUDADUR-583277, TQ: KUSHTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NANDINI B.SOMAPUR, AGA FOR R1 TO R5; SRI. S.C.HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R6 TO R15) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO. /257/2025 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 11.09.2025 AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND DISMISS THE INTERIM APPLICATION U/SECTION 55(2) KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT, 1964 DATED 10.09.2025 AS PER ANNEXURE-K AND TO ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF QUO WARRANTO TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT BEARING NO. /257/2025 PURSUANT TO APPEAL FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS NO.6,7,13,14,15 FILED ON 10.09.2025 AS PER ANNEXURE-J AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:184 WP No. 107050 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioner has approached this Court calling in question the order dated 11.09.2025 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, whereby an interim order of status quo has been granted in proceedings initiated to challenge MR.No.15/1990-1991, nearly 35 years after the mutation was effected. Brief facts. 2. The petitioner is the absolute owner and in possession of the agricultural lands bearing Sy.Nos.58/1, 58/2 and 58/3 situated at Jahagirgudadur Village, Kushtagi Taluk, Koppal District, which stood mutated in her name pursuant to MR.No.15/1990-91, following the demise of her husband. The said lands were originally re-granted under the Inams Abolition Act, and the revenue entries remained undisturbed for more than three decades. 3. Certain private respondents earlier instituted O.S.No.343/2021 seeking a declaration that the very same - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:184 WP No. 107050 of 2025 lands are public properties belonging to the Government and for consequential injunction. In the said suit, the State Government and its revenue authorities were impleaded as defendants. 4. In the written statement filed in the said suit, the State categorically admitted that a) the suit lands are not the Government lands, b) there are no records with the Government to claim ownership and c) the petitioner has succeeded to the properties through her husband and the mutation entry was effected in accordance with law. 5. The trial Court, by order dated 21.04.2022, rejected the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC holding that the suit lands are private patta lands and not Government properties. The said finding was affirmed by this Court in RFA.No.100259/2022 and has attained finality. 6. Despite the above final adjudication, the private respondents filed an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner in 2025, assailing MR.No.15/1990-91, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:184 WP No. 107050 of 2025 without filing any application for condonation of delay and without disclosing the earlier Civil suit proceedings. The Assistant Commissioner, by the impugned order dated 11.09.2025 granted an interim order of status quo, which has given rise to the present writ petition. 7. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 to 5-State and learned counsel for the private respondent Nos.6 to 15. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the impugned order is wholly without jurisdiction as the Assistant Commissioner could not have entertained a challenge to a mutation entry after a lapse of nearly 35 years, especially in the absence of an application for condonation of delay. It is argued that the State itself had admitted before the Civil Court that the lands are not Government properties and that the mutation was lawful, which admission binds the revenue authorities. It is - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:184 WP No. 107050 of 2025 contended that the grant of interim relief, ignoring the settled rights and binding Civil Court's findings is arbitrary and amounts to abuse of process of law. It is further contended that the impugned proceedings are clear attempt to circumvent the finality of the judicial order by resorting to revenue remedies. 9. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the respondent-State seeks to sustain the impugned order by contending that the State Commissioner is vested with statutory powers under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (‘Act, 1964’ for short) to examine the legality and correctness of the mutation entries. It is contended that the revenue authorities are empowered to correct any irregularities in the mutation entries and the impugned order does not finally determine the rights of the parties. 10. Learned counsel appearing for the private respondents contends that the mutation entry MR.No.15/1990-91 is alleged to have been obtained without - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:184 WP No. 107050 of 2025 proper verification and the lands in question have been used for public purpose including grazing. It is contended that the interim order of status quo is only a protective measure and does not cause any prejudice to the petitioner, and contend that the appeal before the Assistant Commissioner has been filed to prevent alienation of lands and to safeguard the alleged public interest. 11. This Court has carefully considered the rival contentions and having heard the learned counsel for the parties, the point that arises for consideration is: “Whether the Assistant Commissioner could have entertained an appeal challenging MR.No.15/1990-91 after a delay of more than 35 years, and whether the Assistant Commissioner was justified in granting an interim order of status quo despite a categorical admission of the State in O.S.No.343/2021, that the subject lands are not - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:184 WP No. 107050 of 2025 the Government properties and the said findings have attained finality?” 12. This Court has given its anxious considerations to the contentions urged and perused the entire material on record. The material on record undisputedly discloses that the very same suit schedule properties were subject matter of O.S.No.343/2021 before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Kushtagi. In the said proceedings, the State Government and its revenue authorities were arrayed as defendants and have actively contested the suit. Significantly, the written statement filed on behalf of the State it was categorically admitted that a) the suit schedule properties are not the Government lands b) there are no documents with the Government to substantiate any claim of State ownership and c) the properties stand in the name of the present petitioner, having been succeeded to her husband, and the mutation entry MR.No.15/1990-91 was effected in accordance with law. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:184 WP No. 107050 of 2025 13. The trial Court on appreciation of the pleadings and material, rejected the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, expressly recording that the properties were private patta lands and not the Government properties. The said finding was affirmed by this Court in RFA.No.100259/2022 and has admittedly attained finality. 14. Once the State itself has taken a clear, unequivocal and categorical stand before a competent Civil Court that the suit lands do not belong to the Government, the same binds the Revenue Authorities functioning under the State. The Assistant Commissioner being a revenue authority, could not have sat in appeal over a concluded Civil adjudication, nor could he have ignored the binding admission made by the State in judicial proceedings. Entertaining a revenue appeal on the premise that the mutation required reconsideration is therefore, ex-facie without jurisdiction and amounts to a collateral attack on a final judicial determination. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:184 WP No. 107050 of 2025 15. The impugned proceedings arise out of an appeal filed challenging MR.No.15/1990-91 after an inordinate delay of more than 35 years. Admittedly, i) no application seeking condonation of delay was filed, ii) no explanation was offered for such extraordinary delay and iii) the Assistant Commissioner has not recorded any satisfaction condoning the delay as a condition precedent for entertaining the appeal. In the absence of condonation of delay, the appeal itself was not maintainable and the Assistant Commissioner lacked jurisdiction even to entertain it, much less to pass any interim order affecting long standing revenue entries. 16. Even assuming for the sake of argument that the appeal was entertainable, the Assistant Commissioner could not have granted an interim order of status quo when a) the mutation entry had stood unchallenged for more than three decades, b) the petitioner's title and possession stood affirmed by Civil Court and this Court, and c) the balance of convenience was only in favour of maintaining settled rights - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:184 WP No. 107050 of 2025 rather than unsettling them at the instance of private individuals with no locus. The grant of interim relief in such circumstances is arbitrary, perverse and contrary to the settled principles governing exercise of discretionary power. 17. The impugned action also suffers abuse of process of law in much as the private respondents, having failed before the Civil Court and sought to re-agitate the very same issue indirectly through the revenue proceedings by suppressing the earlier adjudication. Permitting such course would strike at the very foundation of finality of litigation and erode public confidence in the administration of justice. 18. Before parting with this case, this Court deems it necessary to observe that repeated attempts to unsettle long concluded issues by resorting to indirect and collateral proceedings amounts to a clear abuse of the process of law. Once rights have been adjudicated by a competent Civil Court and affirmed by this Court, it is impermissible for - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:184 WP No. 107050 of 2025 parties-much less revenue authorities to reopen the very same issue under the guise of statutory powers. Entertaining such belated challenges not only undermines the finality of the judicial determinations but also erodes certainty in land and revenue administration. Any further attempt to re-agitate the issue relating to MR.No.15/1990- 91 contrary to the binding to the Civil Court findings, shall be viewed seriously and may invite stringent consequences in law including imposition of exemplary costs. 19. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned order is without jurisdiction, arbitrary and liable to be quashed. The point framed for consideration is answered accordingly and this Court pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. ii. The impugned order dated 11.09.2025 passed by the Assistant Commissioner granting interim - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:184 WP No. 107050 of 2025 status quo in proceedings arising out of MR.No.15/1990-91 is hereby quashed. iii. It is declared that the Assistant Commissioner lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal and to grant any interim relief particularly in view of the categorical admission of the State in O.S.No.343/2021 that the suit schedule properties are not the Government lands and the mutation was effected in accordance with law. iv. The inordinate and unexplained delay of more than 35 years, in the absence of any application for condonation of delay. v. The appeal filed before the Assistant Commissioner challenging MR.No.15/1990-91 is dismissed as not maintainable. vi. The mutation entry MR.No.15/1990-91 shall stand restored and continued and the revenue records shall reflect the petitioner's name without obstruction. - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:184 WP No. 107050 of 2025 vii. Any actions, if any, taken pursuant to the impugned order stands nullified. viii. The respondents are restrained from reopening or re-agitating the issue relating to the said mutation entry in any revenue proceedings contrary to the final adjudication rendered by the Civil Court and affirmed by this Court. ix. No order as to costs. Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, shall stands disposal of. Sd/- JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA AT Ct:VH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22