VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Karnataka High Court 2026 › High Court of Karnataka

Sri Anantha H., v. The State of Karnataka

DISPOSED
Court
High Court of Karnataka
Decided
26 February 2026
Bench
R Devdasauthor
Case no.
WP 6146/2026

Follow Karnataka High CourtFollow R Devdas

Judgment

e -e1e-eeeee e e NC:(2026:KHC:12421 WP(No.(6146(of(2026 IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU( THDATED(THIS(THE(26 (DAY(OF(FEBRUARY,(2026( BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(R(DEVDAS( WRIT(PETITION(NO.(6146(OF(2026((KLR-RES) BETWEEN:( SRI.,ANANTHA,H.,, AGED,ABOUT,57,YEARS,, S/O.,HANUMANTHA,RAO,, R/AT,NO.11,,K,NO.67/68, ADDE,VISHWANATHAPURA,, RAJANKUNTE,,BENGALURU,-,560,064., …PETITIONER, (BY,SRI.,VIVEK,B.N,,ADVOCATE,FOR, ,,,,,,SRI.,A.,ABHINAV,RAMANAND,,ADVOCATE), AND:

1., THE,STATE,OF,KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT,OF,REVENUE,,Digitally signedtiby VIDHANA,SOUDHA,, PRIYANKA0H BENGALURU,-,560,001, M REPRESENTED,BY,ITS,SECRETARY., Location: HIGH COURT0OF 2., THE,TAHASILDAR,, KARNATAKA BENGALURU,NORTH,TALUK,,, YELAHANKA,,BENGALURU,-,560,064., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,K.P.,YOGANNA,,AGA), , THIS, WP, IS, FILED, UNDER, ARTICLE, 226, OF, THE, CONSTITUTION,OF,INDIA,PRAYING,TO,ISSUE,A,WRIT,IN,THE,

NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2-TAHSILDHAR TO REGULARIZE THE UNAUTHORIZED OCCUPATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF HOUSE PUT IN THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY BY THE PETITIONER BY CONSIDERING HIS APPLICATION DATED 23.02.2022, THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE -D TO THE WRIT PETITION ON PAR WITH SIMILARLY SITUATED PROPERTIES VIDE ANNEXURE F DATED 25.06.2020, ANNEXURE F1-F5 DATED 20.03.2020 AND ANNEXURE G AND G1 DATED

18.08.2025, ANNEXURE-G2 DATED

11.08.2025 AND ANNEXURE G3 TO G5 DATED 18.08.2025 AND TILL SUCH TIME DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NOT TO TAKE ANY PRECIPITATIVE ACTION IN RESPECT OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY AND ETC.,

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER Learned High Court Government Pleader takes notice for both the respondents.

¶2It is the contention of the petitioner that he being in unauthorised occupation and having constructed a residential house on 1200 square feet of land in Sy.No.70 of Adde Vishwanathapura Village, Hesaraghatta Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk. The petitioner filed an application seeking regularisation of unauthorised occupation of the dwelling house on

23.02.2022. It is contended that Annexure-E is the temporary hakkupatra granted in favour of the petitioner. However, the

respondent-Tahasildar has not executed a sale deed like what is done in the case of the neighboring applicants, as found at Annexure-F. Pursuant to the sale deeds executed in favour of the neighbours, hakkupathras have also been issued, as found at Annexure-G series. The prayer in the writ petition is to issue a writ of mandamus directing the Tahasildar to pass an order regularising the unauthorised occupation and dwelling house in terms of the application filed by the petitioner and thereafter, execute a registered sale deed as was done in the case of the other dwelling house owners.

¶3Having regard to the contentions raised by the petitioner, the writ petition stands disposed of, with a direction to respondent No.2-Tahasildar, Bangalore North Taluk, Yelahanka, to verify from the records the genuineness of the claim made by the petitioner. If it is found that such an application was indeed filed by the petitioner and a temporary grant certificate/hakkupatra was already issued in favour of the petitioner in terms of Annexure-E and if the petitioner complies with all the requirements of law, the Tahasildar shall proceed to pass an order granting the land in favour of the petitioner in

accordance with law. Pursuant thereto, a registered sale deed and hakkupatra shall also be issued in favour of the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶4The entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Needless to observe that till such an order is passed by the Tahasildar, considering the application of the petitioner, no precipitative action shall be taken against the petitioner for dispossession. Ordered accordingly. Learned High Court Government Pleader is permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE SSD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27

Source: High Court of Karnataka, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.