SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 24372

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Sachin Shankar Magadum, J
U. Mamatha – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka Urban Development Department – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 21648 of 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: R. Shashidhara
For the Respondents: Rahul Rai .K, B.K. Manjunath

Non-compliance with layout plan approval nullifies the legal entitlement for e-khata issuance.

Headnote:Sub-section (2B) of Section 17 of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961 was examined concerning khata issuance. The petitioner claimed entitlement to e-khata but faced rejection based on compliance with local circulars. The court concluded that absence of layout plan approval invalidated the demand, asserting urban development regulation necessity. Final outcome: Writ petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. final ruling against the petitioner; writ dismissed. (Para 1 , 5)
2. petitioner seeks issuance of e-khata. (Para 2 , 3)
3. respondent cites valid reasons for khata rejection. (Para 4 , 10)
4. court emphasizes need for sanctioned layout plans. (Para 6 , 8 , 9)
5. past decisions differ due to varying factual contexts. (Para 7)

ORAL ORDER

The captioned petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

"a) Issue writ of Certiorari or any other writ or order or direction, in the nature of writ, setting aside the endorsements issued by the 3rd respondent in respect of khata/assessment No.1900/FB2 in No.PU.HO.KAM.SHA.C.R: 2024-25 dated 21.06.2024 vide Annexure-K, the copy of the endorsement issued in respect of khata/assessment No.1900/6A 41 in No.PU.HO.KAM.SHA.C.R: 2024-25 dated 21.06.2024 vide Annexure-K1 & the copy of the endorsement issued in respect of khata/assessment No.2054/A 40 in No.PU.HO.KAM.SHA.C.R: 2024-25 dated 21.06.2024 vide Annexure-K2 to this writ petition in the interest of justice and equity.

b) Issue writ of Mandamus or any other writ or order or direction, in the nature of writ, directing the 3rd respondent to issue e-katha and katha extract in respect of site bearing katha/assessment No.1900/FB2 measuring east to west 30 feet north to south 42 feet, site bearing No.1900/GA 41 measuring east to west 52 feet north to south 30 feet and site bearing No.2054/A 40 measuring east to west 25 feet north to south 43 feet, all are situated at Holalkere Town, in the interest of justice and equity."

2. The petitioner has purchased a residential site bearing No.41, Assessment No.1900/GA 41, situated at Holalkere Town, measuring east-west 52 feet and north- south 30 feet, for valuable sale consideration under a registered sale deed dated 06.05.2010. The petitioner asserts that a manual khata was issued by the local authority in 2015, as evidenced by Annexures-D and E. The petitioner further contends that he has been regularly paying property tax in respect of the said residential site, and the SAS Form for the year 2023-24 evidences the same at Annexure-F.

3. The petitioner submitted an application before respondent No.3 seeking issuance of e-khata in respect of the petition schedule property by enclosing the title deed, conversion order, and tax paid receipts. However, respondent No.3 rejected the application vide endorsement dated 21.06.2024, citing reliance on the circulars issued by respondent Nos.1 and 2 dated 22.03.2017 and 05.01.2018 respectively. Aggrieved by the said endorsement, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of the same and issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondent No.3 to issue e-khata and khata extract in respect of the petition property.

4. Respondent No.3 – Holalkere Town Municipality has filed objections opposing the petition. It is contended that the impugned endorsement is strictly in conformity with Circular No.7/TTP/2017 dated 22.03.2017 issued by respondent No.1. By referring to the said notification as well as the order passed by the Karnataka Lokayukta in Complaint No.Upa-Lok/B.D.4551/DRE-5, respondent No.3 submits that it was bound to reject the petitioner’s request. It is further submitted that respondent No.3 has made efforts by addressing a letter to the Government seeking directions to enable issuance of e-khata by collecting betterment charges at 10% of the current market value of sites. This representation is placed at Annexure-R4. Respondent No.3 further submits that despite such representation, respondent No.1 issued another Circular to respondent No.2 bearing No.Na.Aa.E.185.Bemapra:2017 dated 21.03.2018 (Annexure-R5), specifically prohibiting issuance of e-khata in respect of plots which do not have layout plan approval from the competent authority.

5. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2, and the learned standing counsel for respondent No.3. The Court has al

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top