Sri Siddanna M v. The State of Karnataka

NC:(2026:KHC:10701( WP(No.(2383(of(2026( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

THDATED(THIS(THE(20 (DAY(OF(FEBRUARY,(2026(

BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(R(DEVDAS( WRIT(PETITION(NO.(2383(OF(2026((KLR-RR/SUR)( BETWEEN:(( ( SRI,SIDDANNA.M, S/O,LATE.,MUTTURAYAPPA,, AGED,ABOUT,34,YEARS,, R/AT,NO.59,,MACHOHALLI,VILLAGE,, DASANAPURA,HOBLI,,BENGALURU,NORTH,TALUK,, BENGALURU,-,560,091.,

…PETITIONER,

(BY,SRI.,HIMA,KIRANA,S.,,ADVOCATE),

AND:( (

1., THE,STATE,OF,KARNATAKA, BY,ITS,SECRETARY,,REVENUE,DEPARTMENT,,

M.S,BUILDING,,BENGALURU,-,560,001., , Digitally 2., THE,THASILDAR, signedtiby SUMA BENGALURU,SOUTH,TALUK,,, Location: KANDAYA,BHAVANA,,BENGALURU,560,001., HIGH0COURT OF …RESPONDENTS, KARNATAKA (BY,SRI.,NAVYA,SHEKHAR,,AGA), , THIS, WP, IS, FILED, UNDER, ARTICLES, 226, AND, 227, OF, THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA,, , PRAYING, TO, DIRECT, THE, RESPONDENT, NO.2, TO, CONTINUE, THE, NAME, OF, SRI.MUTTURAYAPPA,,THE,FATHER,OF,THE,PETITIONER,IN,THE, RTC,OF,THE,LAND,BEARING,SY,NO.,30,TO,AN,EXTENT,OF,4-00, ACRES, OF, KUMBALAGODU, VILLAGE, BY, CONSIDERING, THE, REPRESENTATIONS, GIVEN, BY, THE, PETITIONER, VIDE, ANNEXURES-M,,N,,P,,Q,AND,R,AND,ETC.,

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

ORAL ORDER Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for both the respondents.

¶2It is the contention of the petitioner that the petitioner's father, Late.Sri.Mutturayappa, was granted 4 acres of land in Sy.No.30 of the Kumbalagodu Village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, by orders of the Deputy Commissioner on 03.08.1960. It is contended that in the year 1962, Sri.Mutturayappa deposited the upset price into the Government Treasury, pursuant to which his name was entered in the revenue records. The revenue records continued till the year 1999-2000. However, after computerization and digitization, the name of the petitioner's father was not continued in the computerized RTC. Therefore, the prayer in the writ petition is to direct the respondent No.2-Tahsildar to continue the name of the petitioner's father in the revenue records and thereafter consider the application filed by the

petitioner to enter the name of the legal heirs of Late.Sri.Mutturayappa in the revenue records.

¶3After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Advocate and on perusing the petition papers, this Court finds from the material on record that the name of the petitioner's father-Late.Sri.Mutturayappa, was earlier entered in the land revenue records. However, if the respondent No.2-Tahsildar is of the opinion that the petitioner's father has not been granted lands, it is the duty of the respondent No.2-Tahsildar to secure the original grant records, Saguvali Chit issue register and other contemporaneous records to satisfy himself regarding the grant made in favour of the petitioner's father. Moreover, there is no reason why the name of the petitioner's father, which was earlier entered in the land revenue records has not been continued after computerization, the respondent No.2-Tahsildar is duty bound to look into all these aspects and pass necessary orders in accordance with law. Thereafter, the Tahsildar shall verify if the petitioner is the legal heir of Late.Sri.Mutturayappa, issue notice, hear all concerned parties. Thereafter, if it is found out that the petitioner is the legal heir of

Late.Sri.Mutturayappa, the Tahsildar shall proceed to enter the name of the petitioner along with other legal heirs, as the case may be in the revenue records in accordance with law.

¶4Consequently, this writ petition stands disposed of with a specific direction to respondent No.2 -Tahsildar, Bengaluru South Taluk to consider the representation given by the petitioner and in the light of the observations made hereinabove, verify the original records in the presence of the petitioner and pass necessary orders to enter the name of the petitioner's father-Late.Sri.Mutturayappa in the computerized RTC and land revenue records as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶5Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today.

Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE

BKN/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1