Sri S V Ramachandra Reddy, v. State of Karnataka

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 29832 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR)

BETWEEN:

SRI S V RAMACHANDRA REDDY, S/O LATE VENKATASWAMY REDDY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/A SADALI AT & POST, HOBLI SIDDLAGHATTA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPLUR DISTRICT 562104. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHOWDAREDDY T. M.., ADVOCATE) AND:

¶1STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MS BUILDINGS, BENGALURU -560 001.

¶2THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT, CHIKKABALLAPUR - 562 104.

¶3THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CHIKKABALLALPUR SUB-DIVISION, CHIKKABALLAPUR 562 104.

¶4THE TAHASILDAR, SIDDLAGHATTA TALUK, SIDDLAGHATTA 562105 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SHAMANTH NAIK., HCGP)

by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 29.7.2025 IN NO. RA (SHI)/2025.E-629952 PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, CHIKKABALLAPLUR SUB-DIVISION, CHIKKABALLAPUR, A COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-N AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO RECTIFY THE RTC ENTRY IN RESPECT OF SY. NO.73/2 MEASURING 21 GUNTAS OF NALLAPPANAHALLI VILLAGE, SADALI HOBLI, SIDLAGHATTA TALUK, CHIKKABLLAPLUR DISTRICT IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER EXPEDITIOUSLY TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE 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 On the previous occasion, the following order was passed; Learned HCGP takes notice for all the respondents.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner is directed to serve copies of the writ petition along with Annexures on the learned HCGP.

Since the appeal filed under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, has been disposed of by issuing the impugned endorsement at Annexure-N dated 29.07.2025,

the learned HCGP is directed to secure instructions from the Assistant Commissioner, Chikkaballapura Sub-Division, as to who is the competent authority according to the Assistant Commissioner to consider the appeal filed under Section 136(2) of the Act.

Re-list this matter on 06.02.2026."

¶2Learned High Court Government Pleader submits on instructions that the petitioner is seeking to pay the arrears of land revenue and get the entry 'Sarakari Beelu' removed from the RTC. For that purpose, learned High Court Government Pleader submits that there are orders passed by this court which would be applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case.

¶3This Court, in the case of Shivanna Vs. Deputy Commissioner in W.P.No.19639/2021 dated

05.09.2022 has held that having regard to Section 163 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, and Rule 119 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966, that in normal circumstances where there are arrears of land revenue, it

is not the intention of the Government to forfeit agricultural lands. The provisions are clearly directed towards the other cases where charges are created by orders passed by Courts of law and other competent authorities where the parties are in default for payment and the Courts and authorities deem it fit to direct recovery of such debts to be collected as arrears of land revenue. In all other cases, in terms of the amended provision, which came into effect from 01.04.1988, the Government has granted relaxation and enabled the revenue authorities to accept the application for cancellation of forfeiture even in cases where the land was sold and purchased on account of the Government dues, but which were not disposed of otherwise.

¶4Consequently, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent-Tahsildar, Siddlaghatta Taluk, to inform the petitioner of the arrears of land revenue within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the petitioner is called

upon to pay the arrears of land revenue, they shall pay the same and after payment of the arrears of land revenue, the forfeiture clause shall be removed and the name Sri.Venkataswamy, shall be entered in the revenue records. Thereafter, the Tahsildar shall find out if the petitioner is the only legal heir of Sri.Venkataswamy, and if it is so, the name of the petitioner to be entered, being the legal heir of Venkataswamy, in respect of the land measuring guntas in Sy.No.73/2 situated at Nallappanahalli Village, Sadali Hobli, Siddlaghatta Taluk, in column No.9 of the RTC within a period of two months from the date of payment of the arrears of land revenue, if any. Consequently, the impugned endorsement issued by the Tahsildar, vide Annexure-L is hereby quashed and set aside.

Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE

KLY CT: JL