IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 101719 OF 2026 (KLR-RR/SUR)

BETWEEN:

B. HAMPAMMA W/O. J. BASANNA AGE. 76 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/AT. SUSHEELANAGAR VILLAGE, TQ. SANDUR, DIST. BALLARI-583119.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. V.S.KALASURMATH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, VIDHAN SOUDHA,BENGALURU-01.

2. THE REGIONAL COMMISSIONER, KALABURAGI, DIST. KALABURAGI-585101.

3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BALLARI, DIST. BALLARI-583119.

4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MANJANNA E AND SURVEY SETTLEMENT OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, D M i A g N ita JA lly N s N ig A n E ed by DIST. BALLARI-583119.

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH D 17 a : t 2 e 8 : : 2 0 0 1 2 + 6. 0 0 5 2 3 .2 0 7 5. THE TAHASILDAR, SANDUR, DIST. BALLARI-583119.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NANDINI B.SOMAPUR, AGA)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4 DATED 23.03.2023 BEARING NO.KAM / SURVEY SETTLEMENT/05/2022-23 VIDE ANNEXURE-A IN SO FAR AS SY.NO.66(P81) EXTENT 3 ACRE IS CONCERNED; AND ETC.

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

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has approached this court seeking for the following prayers.

“a) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order passed by the respondent No.4 dated 23.03.2023 bearing No./ Kam / Survey Settlement / 05 / 2022-23, vide Annexure-A, in so far as Sy.No.66(P81) extent 3 acre is concerned.

b) Grant such other relief/s as deems fit in the circumstances of the case and allow the writ petition with costs in the interest of justice and equity.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the decisions of this Court in the case of Sri Bharamappa R Vs. The state of Karnataka and others

1 W.P.No.100893/2026 disposed of on 11.02.2026

(Bharamappa’s case) and also in the case of Somappa T Vs. The State of Karnataka and others, W.P.No.100895/2026 disposed of on 11.02.2026 (Somappa). 3. Learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents-State does not dispute that the issue involved in the present case is covered by the decision rendered by this Court in Bharamappa’s case and the petition stands similarly covered.

4. This Court in the case of Bharamappa has held at paragraph Nos.8, 9 and 10 as under:

8. On careful examination of the impugned order dated 23.03.2023 (Annexure-A), though it indicates that notice was ordered and a survey was conducted subsequently, it does not demonstrate that the mandatory procedure contemplated under Sections 118 to 121 of the KLR Act has been followed by respondent No.4. Section 118 of the KLR Act mandates that any determination or alteration relating to the classification or description of land in the revenue records, particularly when such determination has civil consequences, must be

preceded by due notice to the affected parties and an appropriate enquiry, likewise, Sections

119 to 121 of the KLR Act.

9. In the present case, the name of the petitioner’s predecessor-in-interest, who was conferred with tenancy and occupancy rights as early as in the year 1981, has been deleted and the land has been shown as ‘Gudda (B Kharab)’ land, without affording an opportunity of hearing and without conducting an enquiry as contemplated under the KLR Act. Such an exercise is arbitrary and in clear violation of the statutory safeguards embedded under the provisions of the said Act. The unilateral alteration of the revenue records, more so when it affects the civil rights of the parties and the accrued rights flowing from the grant of tenancy, cannot be sustained in law. Hence, the im