IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT PETITION NO. 33001 OF 2016 (LR)

BETWEEN:

1. SRI. B GANESH RAO

S/O SRI. B. VITTAL RAO AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS

R/O KALKATTA, MANJANADI VILLAGE

MANGALANTHI POST

MANGALORE TALUK - 575 018

DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT

(SINCE DECEASED, REP. BY LR'S)

1(A). SMT. JAYANTHI KUMARI,

W/O LATE B. GANESH RAO

AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS

1(B). RAVISHANKAR

Digitally signed S/O LATE B. GANESH RAO

by PANKAJA S

AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS

Location: HIGH

COURT OF

KARNATAKA

PETITIONERS NO.1(A) AND 1(B)

BOTH ARE R/AT SHANBAGH HOUSE,

SHREYA, D.NO. 2-69(1A)

MANJANADI VILLAGE

MANGALANTHI POST, MANGALORE TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 575 018.

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. DEEPAK WAGLE, ADV. FOR

SRI. KESHAVA BHAT A., ADV.

FOR LRs OF DECEASED PETITIONER)

AND:

1. LAND REFORMS AUTHORISED OFFICER CUM LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MANGALORE CITY CORPORATION DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT MANGALORE - 575 001.

2. SRI. SUNIL GANGADHARAN S/O LATE SRI. GANGADHARAN AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS NO.148, FIRST BLOCK VIDYARANYAPURAM BANGALORE - 560 097.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL CARIAPPA, AGA FOR R1;

SRI. SANGAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. CHANDRANATH ARIGA K., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS AND ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER MADE THEREIN BY THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 27.11.2015 IN APPEAL NO.1002/2007 (REVENUE) ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

ORAL ORDER

In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has sought for a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 27.11.2015 in Appeal No.1002/2007 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (for brevity 'KAT') and to restore the order dated 25.03.2006 passed by respondent No.1 as per Annexure-

B.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that his father has filed Form No.7A in respect of the land measuring 65 cents in Sy.No.107/1C of Manjanadi Village, Mangalore Taluk (for brevity "subject land") on 25.03.2006. Respondent No.1 i.e., the Land Tribunal has granted occupancy rights in respect of the subject land in favour of the petitioner. The said order has been challenged by respondent No.2 before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (KAT) in Appeal No.1002/2007. The KAT has allowed the appeal and set aside the order passed by respondent No.1.

Challenge to the same is lis before this Court.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner so also the learned counsel for the contesting respondent.

4. The primary contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he was in possession and cultivation of the subject land before 01.03.1974. Since he failed to file Form No.7 and continued in possession of the land, he filed Form No.7A, which was rightly considered by respondent No.1 and granted occupancy rights. Despite, the KAT has set aside the order on the ground that the father of petitioner has filed Form No.7 in respect of several other lands and also he is having excess land than specified in Section 77A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (for brevity 'the KLR Act') without examining any documents. Accordingly, he prays to allow the appeal.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the application filed under Section 77A of KLR Act, is not maintainable since the father of petitioner filed Form No.7 under respondent No.1 in respect of other lands and he stated in Form No.7 that he was in possession of the subject land, despite, he failed to file Form No.7. As such, the subsequent application under Form No.7A under Section 77A is not maintainable in view of the settled position of law by this Court. He further contented that, in view of the land ceiling prescribed under Section 77A of the KLR Act also the petitioner is not entitled for grant of occupancy right in