- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2492 WP No. 100112 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 100112 OF 2025 (LR) BETWEEN: SHRI. SHIVAPUTRAPPA BASAVANNEPPA PYATI, AGE. 87 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. BACHANKERI, BAILAHONGAL, DIST. BELAGAVI-591 102. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SOURABH HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER, BELAGAVI, NEAR COURT COMPOUND, BELAGAVI-590 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BAILAHONGAL, BAILAHONGAL, DIST. BELAGAVI-591 102. 3. THE TAHASHILDAR, BAILAHONGAL, BAILHONGAL, DIST. BELAGAVI-591 102. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NANDINI B.SOMAPUR, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO MAKE NECESSARY CORRECTION IN THE ORDER DATED 02.04.2016 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 DATED 02.04.2016 BEARING NO.KLR/77A/SR- 02/99/BACHANKERI VIDE ANNEXURE-A WHEREIN, THE SY.NO.OF THE PETITION PROPERTY IS WRONGLY MENTIONED AS SY.NO.96/6 INSTEAD OF SY.NO.94/6; ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO ENTER THE NAME OF PETITIONER IN SY.NO.94/6 (WRONGLY MENTIONED AS 96/6) WHICH IS AN AGRICULTURAL LAND MEASURING 28 GUNTHAS SITUATED AT BACHANKERI, TAL. BAILHONGAL; AND ETC. GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2026.02.20 11:36:20 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2492 WP No. 100112 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner, aged about 87 years and an agriculturist by occupation, has approached this Court seeking a writ of mandamus to correct a clerical error in the order dated 02.04.2016 bearing No.KLR 77A/SR-02/99/Bachankeri (Annexure-A), wherein the survey number of the granted land has been erroneously mentioned as Survey No.96/6 instead of Survey No.94/6, and for a consequential direction to enter his name in the revenue records in respect of Survey No.94/6 measuring 28 guntas situated at Bachankeri Village, Bailhongal Taluk, Belagavi District. 2. Brief facts of the case: 2.1. The petitioner had filed an application in Form No.7A seeking grant of occupancy rights in respect of agricultural land measuring 28 guntas - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2492 WP No. 100112 of 2025 situated at Bachankeri Village, Bailhongal Taluk in Survey No.94/6. 2.2. Pursuant to the said application, the competent authority conducted an enquiry and a spot inspection was carried out on 28.05.2012, and the inspection report specifically referred to Survey No.94/6. 2.3. The Village Accountant submitted a report confirming the inspection of Survey No.94/6. Thereafter, the Revenue Inspector, Kittur, by recommendation dated 31.05.2012 (Annexure - E), recommended grant of land in favour of the petitioner after verifying mutation entries and other relevant records in respect of Survey No.94/6. 2.4. It is stated that, while passing the order dated 02.04.2016, the survey number was erroneously mentioned as 96/6 instead of 94/6. It is further stated that Survey No.96/6 is not in existence - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2492 WP No. 100112 of 2025 and that there are no mutation entries pertaining to the said survey number. 2.5. Despite submitting a representation dated 16.07.2021 seeking correction of the clerical error, no action has been taken by the respondents, compelling the petitioner to approach this Court in this writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire enquiry proceedings, including the spot inspection and recommendation, were conducted only in respect of Survey No.94/6 and not Survey No.96/6. By drawing attention of this Court to Annexure-E, it is contended that the competent authority verified and recommended grant of Survey No.94/6, and the mention of Survey No.96/6 in the order dated 02.04.2016 is a bona fide clerical and typographical error, as survey No.96/6 is not in existence and there are no mutation records pertaining to the said survey number. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2492 WP No. 100112 of 2025 4. Learned Addl. Government Advocate has filed an affidavit on behalf of respondent No.3 — the Tahsildar, Kittur. In paragraphs 3 to 8 of the affidavit, it is stated as under: 3. I submit that a clerical error occurred in the Record of Rights due to the handwriting of the then Village Accountant, where the survey number was inadvertently recorded as 96/6 instead of the correct 94/6. Then corrected as 94/6 in record of rights at the same time 4. It is further submitted that prior to and following this clerical error, all official documents consistently and correctly identified the land as Sy. No.94/6. This includes the spot inspection conducted on 28/05/2012, the Village Accountant's report of the same date, and the Revenue Inspector's recommendation dated 31/05/2012. 5. I state that the Petitioner submitted an application (Form No.7A) incorrectly mentioning Sy. No. 96/6. Our records indicate that property bearing Sy. No. 96/6 does not exist in the vicinity. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2492 WP No. 100112 of 2025 6. Consequently, due to the incorrect survey number provided in the Petitioner's application, the Village Accountant and the Revenue Inspector had to correct their reports to align with the actual land identified during inspection, which is Sy. No. 94/6. 7. I submit that the error in the final order dated 02.04.2016 (Annexure-A) stems from the initial incorrect application. If the Petitioner submits a fresh, corrected application for Sy. No. 94/6, the authorities are ready to consider the same in accordance with the law and the findings of the spot inspection report. 8. Therefore, the error in the order is a genuine clerical mistake resulting from the discrepancy between the revenue records and the petitioner's initial application. Emphasis supplied 5. In the affidavit, it is stated that clerical error has occurred in the record due to the handwriting discrepancy, wherein the survey number was inadvertently recorded as 96/6 instead of the correct 94/6. Further it is stated that if a fresh corrected - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2492 WP No. 100112 of 2025 application is submitted, the authorities are willing to consider the same in accordance with law. 6. The material on record indicates that enquiry was conducted only in respect of survey No.94/6 measuring 28 guntas and there are no material whatsoever to show that Survey No.96/6 was the subject matter of enquiry nor there are any mutation entries to show the existence of Survey No.96/6. 7. The discrepancy of survey number in the impugned order is therefore clearly a clerical and typographical error and requiring the petitioner, who is aged 87 years, to submit a fresh application would be wholly unwarranted. Once the authorities themselves have admitted that the mistake is clerical, insisting upon a fresh application would amount to imposing an unnecessary procedural burden particularly upon a 87 years old agriculturist. Hence, this Court is of the considered view that appropriate direction is to be - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2492 WP No. 100112 of 2025 issued to correct the error on the face of the record, particularly when no adjudication of disputed facts is required and the correction sought is purely clerical in nature. In the present case, refusal to correct such an error would defeat the substantive rights of the petitioner. 8. Accordingly this Court pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. ii. A writ of mandamus is issued, respondent Nos.1 to 3 are directed to correct the survey number mentioned in the order dated 02.04.2016 by substituting Survey No.94/6 in place of Survey No.96/6. iii. The respondents are further directed to carry out consequential corrections in the revenue records and enter the name of the petitioner in respect of Survey No.94/6 measuring 28 guntas situated at - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2492 WP No. 100112 of 2025 Bachankeri Village, Bailhongal Taluk, Belagavi District, in accordance with law. iv. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA gab/Ct:VH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4