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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 38427

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
MALLAPPA S/O BASAPPA AVAKKANAVAR – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WP 105677/2025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 105677 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)

BETWEEN:

1. MALLAPPA S/O BASAPPA AVAKKANAVAR, AGE. 47 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. WARD NO.7, NEAR GLPS SCHOOL, THOT 1, GLBC CANAL ROAD, YARGATTI, TQ. RABKHAVI BANAHATTI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587 312.

2. BASAPPA S/O GRIMALLAPPA PUJARI, AGE. 47 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. WARD NO.2, TOTAD SHALE 1, YARGATTI, TQ. RABKHAVI BANAHATTI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587 312.

3. SUBHASH S/O BASAPPA AVAKKANAVAR, C LA H X A M N A D N RASHEKAR AGE. 47 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, KATTIMANI DCKAHig TAit TNa I l MDyRA sAN igSI nHeEdK bAyR LAXMAN R/O. WARD NO.7, NEAR GLPS SCHOOL, LKD+ oaa0 crt5ena 3: ta 0 i 2toa0 nk2 :a 5 H, .D1 ig 1hh .a2 Cr7wo 1 ua2 rdt : 5 Bo 4ef :n4c3h THOT 1, GLBC CANAL ROAD, YARGATTI, TQ. RABKHAVI BANAHATTI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587 312.

4. ASHOK S/O BASAPPA AVAKKANAVAR, AGE. 47 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. WARD NO.1, TOTAD SHALE, YARGATTI, TQ. RABKHAVI BANAHATTI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587 312.

5. HANAMANT S/O NINGAPPA AVAKKANAVAR, AGE. 47 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. MADALMATTI, PO: HALINGALI, TQ. JAMKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587 315.

… PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VITTHAL S. TELI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BAGALKOT, SECTOR 61, NAVA NAGAR, BAGALKOTE, KARNATAKA-587 103.

3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, JAMKHANDI-SUB-DIVISION, JAMKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587 301.

4. THE TAHASILDAR, RABKAVI-BANAHATTI, TAHSILDAR OFFICE, RABKAVI-BANAHATTI, BAGALKOT DISTRICT-587 311. 5. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR, TERDAL CIRCLE,TERDAL, DIST. BAGALKOT-587 315.

6. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR (LEGAL), GODAVARI SUGAR, BIOREFINERIES LTD., SAMEERWADI, TQ. RABKAVI-BANAHATTI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587 316.

7. THE SECRETARY/TAHASILDAR, TALUKA LAND GRANT COMMITTEE, RABKAVI-BANAHATTI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587 311.

… RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MALA B. BHUTE, AGA FOR R1 TO R5 AND R7;

SRI. ARUN L. NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE FOR R6)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 04.07.2025 PASSED IN LND-CR- 13+14+15+16+17+18+19+20+22+23+24/2024-25 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 VIDE ANNEXURE J AND ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.4 AND 7 TO CONSIDER THE FORM NO.57 AND TO PASS ORDERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW BY FIXING TIME LIMIT.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)

This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order marked as Annexure-J dated 04.07.2025 passed by respondent No.3-Assistant Commissioner.

2. In terms of the impugned order, the Assistant Commissioner reviewed the order under Section 25 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, For short, ‘Act of 1964’

3. Certain facts are not in dispute. The petitioners filed an application before the Tahsildar seeking grant of certain land on the premise that they were in unauthorised occupation of the property. The Tahsildar rejected the application without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The petitioners challenged that order before the Assistant Commissioner. The Assistant commissioner allowed the appeal and directed the Tahsildar to place the matter before the Land Grant Committee for consideration of the petitioners’ application for regularisation.

4. Subsequently, respondent No.6, the original owner of the property sought review of the said order. The review application was rejected; however, simultaneously, the order allowing the appeal and remitting the matter to the Tahsildar with a direction to place the matter before the Land Grant Committee was also recalled.

5. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners are before this Court.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitio

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