Smt. Nagarathna v. State of Karnataka

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 39403 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN:

SMT. NAGARATHNA W/O. MAHESH AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, GUDDADABEERANAHALLI VILLAGE, LAKKAVALLI HOBLI TARIKERE TALUK, CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT, PIN 577 228. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MALATESH H., ADVOCATE) AND:

¶1STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT BENGALURU-02.

¶2THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT CHIKMAGALURU-577 101.

¶3THE ASST COMMISSIONER TARIKERE TALUK by SHARADAVANI B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT, PIN 577 228.

¶4THE TAHASILDAR TARIKERE TALUK CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT, PIN 577 228. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SHAMANTH NAIK, HCGP)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 18.01.2025 IN BEARING NO.NCR CR.01/2024-25, E-579203 ISSUED BY THE R4 PRODUCED AS ANNX-A 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 The petitioner is aggrieved of the impugned endorsement dated 18.01.2025 at Annexure-A issued by the Thasildar, Tarikere Taluk declining to enter the name of the petitioner in the revenue records although there was a direction issued by this Court in W.P.No.24484/2024. This Court considered the grievance of the petitioner that the respondent-Tahsildar is not entering the name of the petitioner in the revenue records although the lands in question namely 2 acres in Sy.No.14 of

Guddedabeeranahalli Village, Lakkavalli Hobli, Tarikere Taluk was regularised and granted in favour of the petitioner by order of the Tahsildar, bearing number 5028/1990-91 dated

10.01.1990. This Court while disposing of the writ petition directed the respondent - Tahsildar to consider the representation dated 29.08.2023 given by the petitioner by taking cognizance of the grant order and existing entries till 2001-02 and pass appropriate orders to enter the name of the petitioner in the revenue records. However the Tahsildar issued the impugned endorsement at Annexure-A dated 18.01.2025 stating that the original Grant Register and other contemporaneous records were verified and it is found that there is no information regarding the application filed by the petitioner seeking regularisation of unauthorised occupation. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that such a finding could not have been given by the Tahsildar at this stage when directions were issued by this Court to verify from the original Grant Register and contemporaneous records to find out whether there was a grant made in favour of the petitioner.

¶2During the course of these proceedings the respondent -Tahsildar was directed to place before this Court

the original Grant Register, Sagvali Chit Issue Register and other contemporaneous records to verify the fact regarding the grant made in favour of the petitioner.

¶3Today the learned HCGP has placed before this Court the original Grant Register which has been brought before this Court by the concerned Case Workers and record room Case Workers, from the Office of Tahsildar, since the Tahsildar is said to have been transferred and he has been relieved from the said postings. This Court finds on verification the Mutation Register placed before this Court, at page number 12 of the Mutation Register there is an entry regarding MR No.17/1998-99 entering the name of the petitioner by virtue of the grant order No.5028/1990-91 dated 10.01.1990 made by the Tahsildar. It is also noted that Saguvali Chit bearing No.204/1998-99 dated 14.04.1998 has been issued to the grantee namely the petitioner herein with a condition that she shall not alienate the property in question for a period of 15 years.

¶4The learned HCGP has also furnished the Saguvali Chit Issue Register which is in a fragile condition. The learned

HCGP submits on instructions that there is no Grant Register. Such a submission cannot be accepted by this Court. Grant Registers are documents which cannot be destroyed. It is the responsibility of the Tahsildar and the revenue authorities to maintain the Grant Register. Moreover the Additional Chief Secretary, Revenue Department had made a statement before this Court, which has been recorded, that all the Grant Registers, Saguvali Chit Issue Registers and Mutation Registers are scanned and kept in the Office so that there will be no further scope for interpolation or to say that the Grant Registers are not available.

¶5Be that as it may, for the purpose of this case, since this Court has verified from the Mutation Register which bears the information regarding grant made in favour of the petitioner and the mutation entry made therein, it was impermissible for the Tahsildar to have issued the impugned endorsement at Annexure-A saying that there is no information regarding the application said to have been filed by the petitioner. Having regard to the directions issued by this Court in W.P.No.24484/2024 the action of the Tahsildar in issuing the

impugned endorsement would be nothing short to contempt of Court.

¶6However since the Tahsildar has been transferred, no useful purpose would be served in considering the action of the Tahsildar.

¶7For the reasons stated above, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned endorsement at Annexure-A issued by the Tasildar, Tarikere Taluk is hereby quashed and set aside. Specific directions are hereby issued to the Tahsildar, Tarikere Taluk and the Deputy Commissioner, Chikkamangaluru District, to proceed to enter the name of the petitioner in the computerized RTC as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Failing which, serious action will be taken against the Deputy Commissioner and the concerned Tahsildar. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE GPG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19