Sri Kashinath P v. State of Karnataka

NC:(2026:KHC:14325( WP(No.(38512(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( (

IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

THDATED(THIS(THE(10 (DAY(OF(MARCH,(2026(

BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(R(DEVDAS( WRIT(PETITION(NO.(38512(OF(2025((KLR-RES)( BETWEEN:(( (

1., SRI,KASHINATH,P, SON,OF,SRI,KASHANNA,P,,, AGED,ABOUT,40,YEARS,,, RD R/AT,NO.4,3 ,MAIN,,PIPELINE,ROAD,,, BHEL,MINI,COLONY,,MALLASANDRA,,,

T,DASARAHALLI,,, BENGALURU,560,057., ,

2., SRI,PARAMASHIVAIAH,P,B, SON,OF,SRI,BYLAPPA,,, AGED,ABOUT,56,YEARS,,, R/AT,NO.,24,,SRI,BASAVESHWARA,NILAYA,,, ST ST1 ,MAIN,ROAD,,1 ,CROSS,,,

KIRLOSKAR,LAYOUT,,, NEAR,SAPTHAGIRI,LAYOUT,, SIDEDAHALLI,,BENGALURU,560,073.,

Digitallytisigned , by0JUANITA 3., SRI,DHANANJAYA,G,H, THEJESWINI SON,OF,SRI,HANUMANTHAIAH,G,A,, Location:0HIGH AGED,ABOUT,46,YEARS,,, COURT0OF ST R/AT,NO.,136,,1 ,MAIN,ROAD,,GOPALAPURA,,KARNATAKA NEAR,HESARAGHATTA,MAIN,ROAD,,, GOLLAHALLI,,BENGALURU,RURAL,562,123., ,

4., SMT,BHAVYA,R, WIFE,OF,SRI,DHANANJAYA,G,H,,, AGED,ABOUT,36,YEARS,,, STR/AT,NO.,136,,1 ,MAIN,ROAD,,GOPALAPURA,,, NEAR,HESARAGHATTA,MAIN,ROAD,,, GOLLAHALLI,,BENGALURU,RURAL,562,123., …PETITIONERS, (BY,SRI.,SHIVA,KUMAR,N.,,ADVOCATE), NC:(2026:KHC:14325( WP(No.(38512(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( AND:( (

1., STATE,OF,KARNATAKA, REVENUE,DEPARTMENT,, VIDHANA,SOUDHA,,, BENGALURU,,, REP.,BY,PRINCIPAL,SECRETARY,,, REVENUE,DEPARTMENT., ,

2., THE,DEPUTY,COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU,RURAL,DISTRICT,,, JILLADALITA,BHAVAN,,, BEERASANDRA,VILLAGE,,, KUNDANA,HOBLI,,, DEVANAHALLI,TALUK,562,110., ,

3., THE,ASSISTANT,COMMISSIONER, DODDABALLAPUR,SUB,DIVISION,,, DODDABALLAPUR,561203., ,

4., THE,TAHSILDAR, NELAMANGALA,TALUK,,, NELAMANGALA,562123., ,

5., T,RAVINAYKA, S/O,THIMMANAYKA,,, R/AT,KENGAL,VILLAGE,,, BARAGENAHALLI,POST,,, SOMPURA,HOBLI,,, NELAMANGALA,TALUK,,, BENGALURU,RURAL,DISTRICT,562111., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.V.SESHU.,,HCGP,FOR,R1,TO,R4, ,,,,,,SMT.,SAMASHRITHA.R.,,ADVOCATE,FOR,, ,,,,,,SRI.,AKARSH,KUMAR,GOWDA.,,ADVOCATE,FOR,R5), , , THIS,WP,IS,FILED,UNDER,ARTICLES,226,&,227,OF,THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA, PRAYING, TO, QUASHING, THE, IMPUGNED, ORDER, DATED, 06/12/2025, BEARING, NO., BRDC-LNDGOLNDN/128/25-LYDREGNEL, PASSED, BY, R2, (VIDE, ANNEXURE-A),BY,ALLOWING,THE,INSTANT,WP,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

It is the contention of the petitioners that at the instance of respondent No.5, who is inimically disposed towards the petitioners, the Deputy Commissioner has passed the impugned Official Memorandum at Annexure-A reserving 17 guntas of land in Sy.No.8 which is abutting the layout formed by the petitioner, and reserving the same for the purpose of a burial ground. Learned Senior counsel submits that in Sy.No.36, which is also abutting the lands in question, there are large extents of land for usage of burial ground. It is submitted that an extent of 2 acres are already reserved for that purpose and there was no need for the Deputy Commissioner to have considered the claim of respondent No.5 and other persons for reservation of 17 guntas of land in Survey No.8 as burial ground.

¶2When the matter had come up for Preliminary Hearing, learned High Court Government Pleader was directed to secure instructions from the respondent No.2 - Deputy Commissioner as to why there was a need to reserve the 17 guntas of land in Survey No.8 when other tracts of land were also available in Survey No.36.

¶3Having regard to the orders passed by this Court on 09.01.2026, learned High Court Government Pleader today submitted on instructions that the 2 acres of land which were earlier reserved for a burial ground in Survey No.36 of the same village were found unusable for the purpose for which they were reserved, and therefore, at the request of the local villagers, action is taken by the Deputy Commissioner to reserve 17 guntas of land in Survey No.8, which is a 'gunduthopu', for the purpose of a burial ground.

¶4At this juncture, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that though there

was a requirement of getting a report from the Tahsildar regarding the present status of 2 acres of land in Survey No. 36, which were already reserved for the purpose of a burial ground, no information is forthcoming from the records.

¶5The respondent-Deputy Commissioner was required to file statement of objections within a period of one week giving all necessary details, including the fact as to whether report was obtained by the Deputy Commissioner in respect of Survey No.36 measuring 2 acres which was already reserved for a burial ground.

¶6Today, learned High Court Government Pleader submits on instructions that the impugned order passed by the Deputy Commissioner may be set aside to enable the Deputy Commissioner to reconsider the grant of lands for burial ground.

¶7In that view of the matter, since the Deputy Commissioner seeks to reconsider and grant any other

alternative land, if necessary, for the purpose of burial ground, the writ petition is allowed, while setting aside the impugned order dated 06.12.2025 at Annexure A passed by the 2nd respondent - Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Rural District. Liberty is however reserved to the Deputy Commissioner to grant any other alternative land if necessary for the purpose of burial ground.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE

KLY CT: JL