Allowed

Smt. Latha v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Sept 2024WP/23678/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A land grantee whose name was mutated in the manual RTC but not carried into computerized revenue records sought a direction to consider her representation for reflecting those entries. Finding conscious laxness by the Tahsildar, the Court allowed the writ petition and directed consideration within two months.

What did the court decide?

Tahsildar directed to consider representation dated 03.08.2023 taking cognizance of grant order and manual RTC entries till 2001-02, within two months.

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

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:36310 WP No. 23678 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.23678 OF 2024 (KLR-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT.LATHA W/O RAJU AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS AGRICULTURIST HOSAHALLI VILLAGE LINGADHAHALLI HOBLI TARIKERE TALUK CHIKMAGALURU-577228

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI.H MALATESH, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-02

¶15

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT CHIKMAGALURU-577101

¶16

THE ASST. COMMISSIONER TARIKERE TALUK

¶17

¶18

NC: 2024:KHC:36310 WP No. 23678 of 2024

¶19

CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT PIN CODE -577228

¶20

THE TAHASILDAR TARIKERE TALUK CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT PIN CODE -577228

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI.HARISHA A S, AGA)

¶23

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. 03.08.2023 PRODUCED AS ANNX-D AND ETC.

¶24

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

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

¶27

The petitioner was granted the petition land vide

¶28

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

¶29

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:36310 WP No. 23678 of 2024

¶30

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.

¶31

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

¶32

The petitioner, on account of conscious laxness on the part of respondents, has submitted the representation on 03.08.2023 vide Annexure-D. There is conscious laxness on the part of respondents in not considering the representation. If the grant made in favour

¶33

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.

¶34

¶35

NC: 2024:KHC:36310 WP No. 23678 of 2024

¶36

There being a conscious laxness on the part of

¶37

respondent No.4, this Court passes the following:

¶38

ORDER

¶39

i. The writ petition is allowed.

¶40

ii. Respondent No.4 is hereby directed to consider the representation dated 03.08.2023 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.

¶41

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

¶42

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

¶43

SD/(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE

¶44

NBM

¶45

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2

Smt. Latha v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Latha 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

Sri Chandrappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Gowramma Vs the State of Karnataka

Shankarappa Vs Smt Susheelamma

Sri Byrappa Vs Government of Karnataka

Sri Syed Sirajuddin @ Chand Pasha Vs Smt Maimunnissa

Ashok Madivala Vs the State of Karnataka