IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT PETITION NO. 13749 OF 2020 (LR)

BETWEEN:

SMT. SAROJAMMA

W/O LATE D PUTTACHARI

AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS

R/AT PRASHANTHNAGAR

CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT

GOWRIBIDANUR-561 208

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. ADITYA BHAT, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

CHIKKABALLAPUR, SUB-DIVISION

CHIKKABALLAPUR-562 101

Digitally signed by

PANKAJA S

2. THE TAHSHILDAR

Location: HIGH TALUK OFFICE

COURT OF

KARNATAKA CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT

GOWRIBIDANUR -561 208

3. SRI N ASHWATHNARAYANAPPA

SINCE DECEASED,

REPRESENTED BY HIS LR'S

3.A) JANARDANA

S/O LATE N. ASHWATHNARAYANAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,

RESIDING AT HOSUR VILLAGE ,

HOSUR HOBLI, HOSUR POST,

GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-561 210

3.B) GIRISHA S/O LATE N. ASHWATHNARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, RESIDING AT HOSUR VILLAGE , HOSUR HOBLI, HOSUR POST, GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-561 210

3.C) NAGARJUNA S/O LATE N. ASHWATHNARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, RESIDING AT HOSUR VILLAGE , HOSUR HOBLI, HOSUR POST, GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-561 210

4. SRI H.V NARAYANAPPA S/O LATE VENKATANARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS R/AT GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT HOSURU-561 210.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MILIND DANGE, AGA FOR R1 & R2, SRI. N. S. SHESHADRI, ADVOCATE FOR R3(A-C) & R4)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN APPEAL NO.578/2011 DTD.8.12.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR 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 08.12.2017 passed in Appeal No.578/2011 by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (for brevity, ‘KAT’) as per Annexure - 'A'.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that her husband one D.Puttachari was cultivating land bearing Sy.No.149/1 measuring to an extent of 1 acre 19 guntas and her mother-in-law namely Lakshmamma was cultivating land bearing Sy.No.365/2 measuring to an extent of 4 acres 17 guntas situated at Hosur Village, Hosur Hobli, Gowribidanur Taluk (for brevity, 'subject lands'). The subject lands are tenanted land i.e., Kammar Nowkri Inam. It is the case of the petitioner is that her husband and her mother-in-law were in possession of the subject lands ever since several decades and cultivating the same. The RTC and other revenue entries also effected in their name. However, inadvertently they failed to file application under Form No.7 and after amendment of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act (for brevity, 'the Act'), D.Puttachari has filed an application under Section 77A of the Act in respect of the subject lands in the year 1999. During the pendency of the case he expired and his wife i.e, petitioner came on record as his legal representative.

3. The authorised officer i.e., the Assistant Commissioner after an enquiry under Rule 26(C) of the Karnataka Land Reforms Rules (for brevity, 'the Rules') granted the occupancy right in favour of the petitioner as per order dated 24.05.2007 at Annexure - 'C'. Accordingly, the petitioner continued in the possession of the subject lands. Later, respondent Nos.3 and 4 have filed an appeal before the KAT in the year 2011 i.e., after a lapse of four years by challenging the grant made in favour of the petitioner. The KAT without hearing the petitioner, passed the impugned order dated 08.12.2017 by allowing the appeal and thereby, cancelled the grant made in favour of the petitioner and directed the Tahsildar of Gowribidanur Taluk to take possession of the subject lands and to enter the name of the Government in the revenue records as per Annexure - 'A'. Challenged to the same is lis before this Court.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Despite granting suffic