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. 4592 OF 2020 (KLR-RES)

BETWEEN:

H N HOOVAPPA

S/O NAGAPPA

AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS

R/O YALAVATTI VILLAGE,

NIDIGE HOBLI, SHIVAMOGGA TALUK,

SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 229.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. P N HARISH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

Digitally signed by VIDHANA SOUDHA,

PANKAJA S

BENGALURU-560 001.

Location: HIGH

COURT OF

KARNATAKA 2. THE TAHASILDHAR

SHIVAMOGGA TALUK,

SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 201.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. RAHUL CARIAPPA K.S, AGA FOR R1 AND R2,

SRI. ANANTHA PADMANABHA G.N, ADVOCATE FOR

PROPOSED R3)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-DIRECT THE R-2 TO EXERCISE THE POWERS MANDATED U/S 90-A OF

KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT AND THEREBY PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO CONSTRUCT THE WATER COURSE. INSTALLING PIPELINE FROM THE BOREWELL INSTALLED IN HIS LAND IN SY.NO.55/3 OF YALAVATTI VILLAGE TO HIS ANOTHER LAND IN SY.NO.65/6 OF YALAVATTI VILLAGE MEASURING AN EXTENT OF 3 ACRES 16 GUNTAS.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR "REPORTING COMPLIANCE", THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

ORAL ORDER

In this writ petition, petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing respondent No.2-Tahsildar to exercise the powers mandated under Section 90-A of Karnataka Land Revenue Act and thereby to permit the petitioner to lay pipeline from the bore well installed in his land in Sy.No.55/3 of Yalavatti Village to his another land in Sy.No.65/6 of Yalavatti Village measuring to an extent of 3 acres 16 guntas.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that he had made an application before the Tahsildar in the year 2017 for the similar relief under Form No.50. The said application was rejected by the Tahsildar on the ground that he has no such jurisdiction and directed the petitioner to approach the Civil Court for such remedy. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed an application before the Assistant Commissioner to consider his prayer in LND:CR:1349/2017-18. The said application was partly allowed by the Assistant Commissioner vide order dated 01.12.2018 and directed the Tahsildar to pass appropriate orders after making necessary spot inspection. Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner approached the Tahsildar. However, the Tahsildar once again rejected the claim of the petitioner by issuing an endorsement as per Annexure-D that the petitioner has to approach the Civil Court for the said relief.

3. Aggrieved by the said endorsement the petitioner approached the Deputy Commissioner and filed a dispute. However, the Deputy Commissioner directed the Assistant Commissioner to hold enquiry and pass orders. In pursuance of the order passed by Deputy Commissioner, the Assistant Commissioner issued an endorsement dated 15.10.2019 by directing the Tahsildar to conduct an enquiry. However, the Tahsildar once again issued an endorsement as per Annexure-F directing the petitioner to approach the Civil Court. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred this writ petition for the above relief.

4. This Court vide order dated 01.02.2021 directed the Tahsildar to file statement of objections positively with reference to the relevant provision of law, the reasons assigned for rejection of petitioner's claim relating to laying pipeline through another land in Sy.No.65/6. In pursuance of the said order the Tahsildar had appeared before this Court on 09.04.2025 and submitted that he would implement the order of the Deputy Commissioner and the Assistant Commissioner within a period of two months. However, he failed to implement the undertaking made before this Court and as such, this Court directed the learned Additional Government Advocate to secure instructions from the Tahsildar, Shivamogga Taluk as to why he has not complied with the order dated 09.04.2025 failing which, the Tahsildar to be present before this Court.

5. Today, the