Sri M S Ramakrishanappa v. The State of Karnataka

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 2991 OF 2026 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. M.S. RAMAKRISHANAPPA, S/O LATE. SUBBARAYAPPA.M.P, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/O NO.1447/6, 5TH A MAIN BLOCK, 2ND STAGE, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NITIN RAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. M.S. ASWATHA REDDY, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶1THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶2THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009.

¶3THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER NORTH SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU SOUTH - 560 009. by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶4THE TAHSILDAR BANGALORE NORTH TALUK BENGALURU SOUTH - 560 009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.P. YOGANNA, AGA)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE BEARING DATED 17-11-2025 VIDE NO.NSIR(D)CR.42/2025-26/795188 AS PER ANNEXURE-F ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4 i.e., TAHSILDAR BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, IN RESPECT OF THE LAND BEARING SY.NO.51, MEASURING GUNTAS OF BETHANAGERE VILLAGE, DASANAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK 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 Additional Government Advocate takes notice for all the respondents.

¶2Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner has given a representation at Annexure-A seeking for a grant of 25 guntas of land in Sy.No.51 of Bethanagere Village, Dasanapura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, on the ground that the petitioner is in unauthorised occupation of the said lands for more than 40 years, now respondent No.4-

Tahsildar has issued the impugned notice asking the petitioner to evict himself from the land in question since he is in unauthorised occupation of the lands. Learned counsel submits that the said piece of land is sandwiched between the lands already belonging to the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that without considering the application filed by the petitioner, the Tahsildar could not have issued the notice. Moreover, a favourable report is also made by the concerned Revenue Inspector at Annexures-B, C and D to the Tahsildar, recommending consideration of the grant in favour of the petitioner.

¶3Learned Additional Government Advocate, however, raises an objection that the representation at Annexure-A is for a grant of land and not an application for regularization of unauthorised occupation. Therefore, the petitioner cannot contend that he is in unauthorised occupation of the lands for more than 40 years and that he has sought for grant of the land.

¶4Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the provisions contained in the Karnataka Land Grant

Rules, 1969, will not enable the petitioner to claim that since he is in unauthorised occupation of the lands for 40 years, the same should be granted to him. The consideration which goes into the grant in the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966, is totally different when compared to the provisions contained in Chapter VIII of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, and more particularly, Section 94A for regularisation of certain cases of unauthorised occupation at the hands of the Committee constituted for consideration of such applications. Learned Additional Government Advocate would therefore submit that the petitioner may be directed to give a reply to the notice issued by the Tahsildar and let the Tahsildar consider the reply and take action in accordance with law.

¶5There is substance in the submission made by the learned Additional Government Advocate. The petitioner will have to give a reply to the impugned notice at Annexure-F dated 17.11.2025.

¶6Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner to give a reply to the impugned notice at Annexure-F within a period of two weeks

from today. Respondent No.4-Tahsildar is hereby directed not to precipitate the matter any further for a period of two weeks to enable the petitioner to give a reply to the notice. Thereafter, the Tahsildar shall consider the reply and take action only in accordance with law. It is always open for the petitioner to file an application seeking regularisation of unauthorised occupation under Chapter VIII, whenever permissible in terms of the provisions of the Act. 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.: 7