Sri Puttarudraiah D R v. State of Karnataka

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 3493 OF 2026 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: SRI. PUTTARUDRAIAH D.R D/O. CHANNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.482, 15TH CROSS, JAKKURU LAYOUT, YELAHANKA HOBLI, BENGALURU - 560 064. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MOHAMMED TIPPU SULTAN, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶1STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001 REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

¶2THE TAHSILDAR, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DIST – 560 018. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.B.P. RADHA, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE R2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 13/03/2023 AND by SHARADAVANI B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

31/07/2024 PRODUCED AT ANNX-D AND E RESPECTIVELY SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

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 Additional Government Advocate takes notice for both the respondents.

¶2It is the contention of the petitioner that the petitioner was granted 4 acres and 34 guntas of land in Survey No.67 of Devagere Village, Kengeri Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, Bangalore Rural District, in terms of Order bearing No.LNDRUO.69/1981-82. It is contented that the name of the petitioner has been entered in the revenue records. However, after computerisation the name of the petitioner has been discontinued from the RTC. Therefore, the prayer in the writ petition is to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent-Tahsildar, Bangalore South Taluk, to consider the representations

dated 13.03.2023 and 31.07.2024 at Annexures-D and E to continue the name of the petitioner in the computerized RTC.

¶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 was earlier entered in the land revenue records. However, if the Tahsildar is of the opinion that the petitioner has not been granted lands, nevertheless, it is the duty of the 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. Moreover, there is no reason why the name of the petitioner which was earlier entered in the land revenue records has been continued after computerization, the Tahsildar is duty bound to look into all these aspects and pass necessary orders.

¶4The writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2-Tahsildar, Bangalore South Taluk, to verify from the records and find out if grant was made in favour of the petitioner and if he has paid the kimath. If it is found from the records that the facts stated hereinabove are true, then the Tahsildar shall proceed to enter the name of the petitioner in the computerised RTC in accordance with law. The 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. Ordered accordingly. Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE rv List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4