IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT APPEAL NO. 256 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)

BETWEEN:

1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S BUILDING, AMBEDKAR BEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001

2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER-II, BENGALURU SOUTH SUB-DIVISION, 2^ND FLOOR, BEHIND KANDAYA BHAVANA K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560 009.

Digitally signed by PANKAJA S

3. THE TAHSILDAR, Location: HIGH BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, COURT OF KARNATAKA KANDHAYA BHAVANA, K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560 009.

…APPELLANTS (BY SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH B.G, AGA)

AND:

1. SMT. SARASWATHAMMA W/O LATE VENKATACHAR, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS

2. SRL. CHANDRASHEKAR, S/O.LATE VENKATACHAR, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS

3. SMT. SAVITHA, D/O LATE VENKATACHAR, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT NO.81, H. GOLLAHALLI VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU-560 060.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. CHOKKAREDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R3)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 18.09.2024 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION No.6560/2024 BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE ONLY IN SO FAR AS IT PERTAINS TO THE OBSERVATION/DIRECTION ISSUED AT PARAGRAPH No. 2 AND 3 OF THE OPERATIVE PORTION OF THE ORDER.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K)

The State has preferred this intra Court appeal challenging the order dated 18.09.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.6560/2024, whereby the learned Single Judge passed the following order:

"(i) The writ petition is allowed.

(ii) The impugned enquiry notice dated

8.1.2024 is hereby quashed.

(iii) This Court hereby directs the State Government to initiate an appropriate enquiry against Respondent No. 2/Deputy Commissioner, for his actions that are in blatant violation of the directives issued by this Court and for misusing his authority by attempting to re-examine the genuineness of the grant, which has already been conclusively settled by this Court.

(iv) Cost of Rs.25,000/- each is imposed on respondent No.2/Deputy Commissioner and respondent No.3/Tahsildar payable to petitioner.

(v) The cost shall be paid and compliance shall be reported to the Registry of this Court within a period of four weeks."

2. We have heard Smt.Namitha Mahesh B.G., learned Additional Government Advocate for the appellant- State and Sri Chokkareddy, learned counsel for respondents 1 to 3.

3. The primary contention of the learned Additional Government Advocate is that the Special Deputy Commissioner-II, Bengaluru South Division, has issued a notice to the respondents herein under Section 136(3) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for brevity, "the KLR Act") based on the report furnished to him on 26.12.2013 by the Tahsildar, to produce relevant documents pertaining to subject land. Further, the said action of the Special Deputy Commissioner-II was in compliance of the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.A No.1200/2023 filed by the State and also in the Contempt Petition to ascertain the grant made in favour of the original grantee Lingaiah in the year 1947-

48 under grow more food scheme.

4. She further contended that, on the primary investigation of appellant Nos.2 and 3, it is revealed that land grant order in favour of the respondents was not confirmed by the Competent Authority. In such circumstance, the Deputy Commissioner is empowered to issue notice under Section 136(3) of KLR Act for an enquiry. Without appreciating these aspects of the matter, the learned Single Judge has passed the impugned order, which is liable to be set-aside.

5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that the learned Single Judge has passed the impugned order after meticulously examining the documents on record, which does not call for interference a