Allowed

Smt. Anupama v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC2 Sept 2024WP/23670/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Land grantee's mutation entries existed in manual RTC but were not carried into computerized revenue records. The Tahasildar failed to act on her representation. The High Court directed the Tahasildar to consider the representation taking note of the grant order and entries till 2001-02, within two months.

What did the court decide?

Tahasildar directed to consider representation dated 10.09.2023 (Annexure-D) per the grant order and manual RTC entries till 2001-02 and pass orders within two months.

Smt. Anupama Vs State of Karnataka — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:35524 WP No. 23670 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.23670 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SMT.ANUPAMA W/O ESHWARAPPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS SHANTHIPURA VILLAGE LAKKAVALLI HOBLI TARIKERE TALUK CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT PIN CODE - 577228

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. H MALATESH, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 002

¶13

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT CHIKMAGALURU - 577101

¶14

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TARIKERE TALUK

¶15

¶16

NC: 2024:KHC:35524 WP No. 23670 of 2024

¶17

CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT PIN CODE - 577228

¶18

THE TAHASILDAR TARIKERE TALUK CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT PIN CODE - 577228

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SMT.HARISHA A.S, AGA)

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-4 AND THE CONCERNED REVENUE AUTHORITY TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONERS REPRESENTATION DTD 10.09.2023 PRODUCED AS ANNX-D AND ETC.

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Learned AGA accepts notice for respondents No.1 to 4.

¶26

The petitioner was granted the petition land vide

¶27

grant order dated 13.04.1998. Pursuant to grant, the petitioner's name was duly mutated to the RTC. However, the manual entries were discontinued and are not carried

¶28

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:35524 WP No. 23670 of 2024

¶29

forward to the computerized records maintained by the revenue authorities. This compelled the petitioner to submit a representation requesting the respondent authorities to reflect the entries as they existed in manual RTC.

¶30

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the respondents-State.

¶31

The petitioner, on account of conscious laxness on the part of respondents, has submitted the representation on 10.09.2023 vide Annexure-D. There is conscious laxness on the part of respondents in not considering the representation. If the grant made in favour

¶32

of the petitioner was intact and the grantee's name was mutated and reflected in the ownership column till 2001-02, the petitioner has a legal right to seek a direction at the hands of this Court. Correspondingly, respondent No.4 is obligated to consider representation and pass appropriate orders.

¶33

¶34

NC: 2024:KHC:35524 WP No. 23670 of 2024

¶35

There being a conscious laxness on the part of

¶36

respondent No.4, this Court passes the following:

¶37

ORDER

¶38

i. The writ petition is allowed.

¶39

ii. Respondent No.4 is hereby directed to consider the representation dated 10.09.2023 as per Annexure-D in accordance with law by taking cognizance of the grant order and the existing entries till 2001-02 in the manual RTC and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶40

iii. This exercise shall be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶41

iv. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed off.

¶42

SD/(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE

¶43

NBM

¶44

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34

Smt. Anupama v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Anupama v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Chowdamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Doddegowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Adhinarayan Reddy Vs Department of Revenue

Sri Y R Chandrashekar Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Shivarudramma Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Chandrashekhar Vs State of Karnataka