Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 21523
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
JYOTI MULIMANI, J
MAHANANDA W/O LATE KASHINATH – Appellant
Versus
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BIDAR-585401 – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO.202398 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR)
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.ANNARAYA M.PATIL.
For the Respondents: SRI. SHESHADRI JAISHANKAR M.
The state lacks authority to unilaterally delete land ownership records without following due procedure as per statutory authority.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227 - Land Revenue Act, 1964 - Writ Petition to quash mutation orders and restore petitioner's name in revenue records - Court held that the order to delete petitioner's name was without basis and not traceable to statutory power, reaffirming previous decisions. (Paras 4-6)
(B) Statutory Authority - The powers conferred under Section 96 allow for necessary actions against unauthorized non-agricultural use of land, while the State cannot outright forfeit land without statutory authority. (Paras 4-6)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged the deletion of her name from revenue records regarding specific lands, arguing procedural flaws and lack of authority for the state’s actions, referencing case law for relief.
Findings of Court:
The court allowed the petition, quashing the impugned orders, and directed restoration of petitioner’s name in records, emphasizing procedural compliance under the Act.
Issues: Whether the state had the authority to delete the petitioner’s name and the appropriate course of action concerning unauthorized land use.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the lack of statutory power in the state's initial action against the petitioner, reinforcing the protection of landowners against arbitrary actions.
Result: Petition allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court addresses procedural flaws in land record alterations. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. court clarifies statutory actions under relevant land laws. (Para 4) |
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO.202398 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR)
BETWEEN:
MAHANANDA W/O LATE KASHINATH, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O H. NO.20-637, KALLUR ROAD, VEERBHADRESHWAR COLONY, HUMNABAD, TQ. HUMNABAD, DIST. BIDAR.
…PETITIONER (BY SRI.ANNARAYA M.PATIL., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BIDAR-585401.
2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BIDAR-585401.
3. THE TAHSILDAR, TAHSILDAR OFFICE, CHITTAGUPPA, TQ. CHITTAGUPPA, DIST. BIDAR-585401.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHESHADRI JAISHANKAR M., AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.
THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER Sri.Annaraya M.Patil., counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Sheshadri Jaishankar.M., AGA for the respondents have appeared in person.
2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking following reliefs:
A. Certiorari to quash the order of Mutation M.R.H9/2019-20 dated 10.06.2020 as per order in SR/LND/CR/06/2019-20 dated 06.01.2020 and ROR in the year 2020 to 2025 in respect of land Sy.No.42/* measuring 02 Acre 03 Guntas situated at Hipparaga Village, Chittaguppa Hobli, Tq. Chittaguppa, District Bidar and direct the respondents to delete the name of State Government and restore the name of petitioner in all revenue records in Column No.9 and 12 vide Annexure-C1.
B. And Mutation M.R.:H12/2019-20 dated 13.08.2020 as per order in SR/LND/CR/06/2019/20 dated 06.01.2020 and ROR in the year 2020 to 2025 in respect of land Sy.No.43/*/1 measuring 34 Guntas situated at Hipparagi Village, Chittaguppa Hobli, Tq. Chittaguppa, District Bidar and direct the respondents to delete the name of State Government and restore the name of petitioner in all revenue records in Column No.9 and 12 vide Annexure-C.
3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the issue involved in the present petition is directly and squarely covered by the Judgment of this Court in the case of Pashamiyan S/o. Maheboobsab Ladaf Vs. The Deputy Commissioner and two others , in W.P.No.200937/2024 (KLR-RR/SUR), disposed of on 05.06.2024, wherein, it is held as under:
“ORDER The petitioner claims to be the owner of 1 acre 35 guntas of land in Sy.No.329/3 of Yarandi village, Rajeshwar Hobli, Basavakalayan Taluk and Bidar District. The petitioner contends that respondent No.1 without issuing any notice and without following the due process of law, directed the authorities to cancel the khata that stood in the name of the petitioner and to enter the name of the State Government in terms of the order bearing No.KAM/LND/CR-06/2019-20 dated nil-2-2020. The petitioner contends that in similar circumstances, this Court had intervened in W.P.No.201500/2022 and directed respondent Nos.1 and 2 to restore the entries in the revenue records. He therefore, prays that the impugned order passed by respondent No.1 be set aside on the same lines as done by this Court in W.P.
No.201500/2022.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated his contentions and prayed that the petition be allowed.
3. Learned High Court Government Pleader, on the other hand submitted that the petitioner has converted the aforesaid land for non-agricultural residential purposes without obtaining appropriate conversion and therefore, respondent No.1 was forced to initiate action against the petitioner.
4. If the petitioner has used agricultural land for non-agricultural purposes without obtaining requisite conversion under Section 95 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short ‘the Act’), the course open to the State authorities is to invoke power conferred under Sect
