IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 104762 OF 2024 (LA-RES)

BETWEEN:

NINGAPPA S/O. BHIMAPPA KURI, AGE. 69 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE & COOLIE, R/O.CHIRALKOPPA, NEAR KULAGERI CROSS, TQ. BADAMI, DIST. BAGALKORE – 587 155.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. Y. R. JOGI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BAGALKOT, ADALITA BAVAN, NAVANAGAR, BAGALKOT, DISTRICT. BAGALKOT – 587 103.

2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BAGALKOT, MINI VIDHAN SOUDHA, NAVANAGAR, BAGALKOT, DISTRICT: BAGALKOT – 587 103.

Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High 3. THE THASHILDAR, Court of Karn ataka, BADAMI TALUK, BADAMI, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad DISTRICT. BAGALKOT – 587 201.

4. THE SECRETARY, APMC, BADAMI TALUK, BADAMI, DISTRICT. BAGALKOT – 587 201.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAMESH CHIGARI, AGA)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 14/02/2024 AS PER ANNEXURE-F AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer:

A. Issue writ of mandamus directing the Respondents 1 to 4 to consider the representation dated 14/02/2024 as per ANNEXURE-F.

B. Pass such other orders or direction as this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.

2. Heard learned counsel Sri. Y.R. Jogi for the petitioner and learned AGA Sri. Ramesh B. Chigari for the respondents.

3. The petitioner submits a representation to the respondents seeking change in the record of rights on certain circumstances as explained in the representation. The representation though is dated 14.02.2024, it has remained unconsidered even as on date despite passage of close to 20 months. It is trite that when a citizen tenders a representation to a public servant, it is to be considered and appropriate orders be passed whether accepting it or rejecting it, not keeping the fate of these petitioners in limbo.

4. The learned AGA representing the respondents would submit that, if reasonable time is granted, the representation would merit consideration and appropriate orders would be passed in accordance with law.

5. In the light of the said submission, without entering into the merit of the claim of the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to dispose the petition with a direction to the respondents-State to consider the representation and pass necessary orders in accordance with law within an outer limit of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and communicate the order so passed to the petitioner.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

(M.NAGAPRASANNA)

JUDGE Kmv CT-ASC