IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 22085 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)

BETWEEN:

1. SMT JAYALAKMAMMA W/O.LATE.SRI.H.LAKSHMAIAH REDDY, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS.

2. SMT. L. MANULA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, W/O.LATE.SRI. GOPALA REDDY, PRESENTLY R/A.NO.90/2, 15TH CROSS, APPA REDDY PALYA, INDIRANAGAR POST, BENGALURU-560 038.

3. SMT.L.CHANDRAKANTHI Digitally signed by AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, JUANITA THEJESWINI W/O.LATE. SRI.N.SURESH BABU, Location: HIGH COURT OF R/A KUDLU VILLAGE, SARJAPURA HOBLI KARNATAKA ANEKAL TALUK-560 068.

4. SRI.L.PURUSHOTHAM REDDY.

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, S/O.LATE. SRI.H.LAKSHMAIAH REDDY.

5. SRI.L.RAGHURAM REDDY.

AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, S/O.LATE.SRI.H.LAKSHMAIAH REDDY PETITIONERS NO.1, 4 & 5 ARE ALL R/A NO. 1/1, THIMMA REDDY ROAD, APPA REDDY PALYA, INDIRANAGAR POST, BENGALURU-560 038.

…PETITIONERS (BY SRI. K M JAGANATH., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SRI L VENKATESH REDDY AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O.LATE. SRI.H.LAKSHMAIAH REDDY, R/A.NO.39/24, THIMMA REDDY ROAD, APPA REDDY PALYA, INDIRANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 038. 2. THE TAHSILDAR.

BENGALURU EAST TALUK, K.R.PURAM, BENGALURU-560036.

3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER.

BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU-560009.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHWIN KUMAR M.S., ADVOCATE FOR R1 SMT. RADHA B.P., AGA. FOR R2 & R3)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH AND DATED 17/02/2025, PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 IN ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER R.A (BE). 30/2025 ALLOWING THE APPEAL FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 HEREIN AS PER ANNEXURE-P, BY ISSUE OF A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR DIRECTION AS THE CASE MAY BE AND CONSEQUENTLY RESTORE THE MUTATION ENTRIES IN M.R.NO.40/2002-03, M.R.NO.23/2003-04 & M.R.NO.H13/2015-

16 AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

ORAL ORDER

The petitioners are aggrieved of the impugned order passed by the 3^rd respondent - Assistant Commissioner at Annexure-P and the consequent mutation order dated 17.02.2025 in MR No.T12/2024-25 passed by the Tahasildar.

2. Learned counsel points out to Annexure-N and submits that Annexure-N is a requisition made by the 1^st respondent to the 2^nd respondent - Tahasildar on 05.08.2024 requesting to delete the mutation entry in MR No.40/2002-03 and MR No.23/2003-04 and restore the katha in the name of the 2^nd respondent in terms of mutation order in IHC No.4/1989-90. Similar representation was also given by the respondent No.1 to the respondent No.3 - Assistant commissioner on 11.11.2024 at Annexure-O. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.3 -Assistant Commissioner has registered the said representation given by the respondent No.1 as an appeal under Section 136 (2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, where the Tahasildar, Bangalore East Taluk, is shown as the respondent. Learned counsel points out from the impugned order at Annexure-P that the Assistant Commissioner has noticed the contention of the respondent No.1 that H.Lakshmaiah Reddy and his second wife and their children created concocted documents during the year 2003 by way of Gift deed and pursuant to which mutation entries were made in M.R.No.40/2002- 2003 and same was challenged by the respondent No.1 herein in R.A.No.375/ 2004-2005 before the Assistant Commissioner. It is contended by the respondent No.1 and recorded by the Assistant Commissioner that the said R.A.No.375/2004-2005 was allowed by setting aside the order in M.R.No.40/2002-03 and M.R. No.23/2003-04 and the name of the respondent No.1 herein was restored in the RTC. However, Sri H.Lakshmaiah Reddy challenged the same before the Deputy Commissioner in R.P. No.31/2006-07, which was also dismissed. It is contended by the respondent No.1 that although such orders were passed by the Assistant Commissioner setting aside the mutation entries, nevertheless the name of the respondent No.1 w