Shri Yankappa L Kotabagi v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC8 Jul 2025WP/102098/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Stream/watercourse blockage and encroachment removal — enforcement of Tahsildar's order; R.S. No.108/2/E, 6 acres 20 guntas, Mugulkohod, Mudhol taluka, Bagalkot district; diversion of stream in R.S. No.108 (24 acres) by adjacent landowners; representation to Deputy Commissioner forwarded to Tahsildar; spot inspection; order No.LND/189561/24-25 dated 29.10.2024 (Annexure-E); final notice 20.01.2025 with 7-day deadline; non-implementation; writ of mandamus under Articles 226 and 227; WP(GM-RES) Karnataka; three-month compliance timeline; AGA undertaking.

What did the court decide?

Writ of mandamus directing respondent No.3-Tahsildar to implement order bearing No.LND/189561/24-25 vide Annexure-E within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. ¶¶36

Shri Yankappa L Kotabagi Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ of mandamus directing respondent No.3-Tahsildar to implement order bearing No.LND/189561/24-25 vide Annexure-E within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

¶¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing respondent No.3-Tahsildar to implement his order dated 29.10.2024 in case No.LND/189561/24-25 (Annexure-E) for removal of the blockage of the stream affecting the petitioners' land R.S. No.108/2/E.

¶¶26

Court's answer

The petition is allowed and a writ of mandamus is issued directing respondent No.3 to implement the order bearing No.LND/189561/24-25 vide Annexure-E within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

¶¶37

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench (Pradeep Singh Yerur, J.), 8 July 2025 — W.P. No. 102098 of 2025 (GM-RES) filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Petitioners Shri Yankappa L. Kotabagi (78) and Shri Prakash s/o Chidanand Kotabagi (35), owners of R.S. No.108/2/E measuring 6 acres 20 guntas at Mugulkohod, Mudhol taluka, Bagalkot district, alleged that adjacent landowners diverted the small stream existing in R.S. No.108 (total extent 24 acres) towards their land, with water entering their house and preventing cultivation. On their representation, the Deputy Commissioner forwarded the matter to the Tahsildar, Mudhol, who issued notice to all owners in R.S. No.108, conducted a spot inspection, found the stream blocked by adjacent landowners and passed an order dated 29.10.2024 in case No.LND/189561/24-25 (Annexure-E) to remove the blockage. The encroachers did not comply; a final notice dated 20.01.2025 gave them seven days. With the order still unimplemented, the petitioners sought a mandamus directing respondent No.3 to implement the order within eight weeks. The learned AGA undertook that respondent No.3 would implement the order if reasonable time were granted. The Court allowed the petition and issued a writ of mandamus directing respondent No.3 to implement order No.LND/189561/24-25 vide Annexure-E within three months from receipt of a copy of the order.

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8503 WP No. 102098 of 2025

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JULY 2025

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 102098 OF 2025 (GM-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SHRI YANKAPPA L. KOTABAGI, AGE: 78 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O. MUGULKOHD, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT-587113.

¶8

SHRI PRAKASH S/O. CHIDANAND KOTABAGI, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE, R/O. MUGULKOHD, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT-587113.

¶9

…PETITIONERS

¶10

(BY SRI. SANTOSH B. RAWOOT, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, R/BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.

¶13

VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶14

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BAGALKOT-587110.

¶15

THE TAHSILDAR, MUDHOL, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT-587110.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI. S.V. MAGADUM, AGA)

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTION, BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO IMPLEMENT THE ORDER DATED 29/10/2024 PASSED BY HIM IN CASE BEARING NO.LND/189561/24-25 VIDE ANNEXURE-E WITHIN EIGHT WEEKS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.

¶19

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8503 WP No. 102098 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned AGA for the respondents.

¶26

2. This petition is filed by the petitioners seeking a direction to respondent No.3 to implement the order passed by him dated 29.10.2024 in case bearing No.LND/189561/24-25 vide Annexure-E.

¶27

3. It is the case of the petitioners that, they are the owners of land bearing R.S. No.108/2/E measuring 6 acres 20 guntas situated at Mugulkohod in Mudhol taluka, Bagalkot district. It is the further case of the petitioners that, the entire R.S. No.108 measures 24 acres and the adjacent land owners have diverted the small stream existing in R.S. No.108 towards the petitioners’ land due to which the water is flowing to their land and is entering to their house and they cannot cultivate the land. Hence, they made a representation to respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner to

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8503 WP No. 102098 of 2025

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

stop the illegal acts of the adjacent owners which was forwarded to respondent No.3-Tahashildar. Respondent No.3 issued notice to all the owners of the land in R.S. No.108 and on conducting spot inspection found the stream was blocked by some adjacent land owners and passed an order to remove the blockage. Despite the order passed by respondent No.3, the encroachers have not removed the blockage of the stream. Thereafter a final notice was issued by respondent No.3 on 20.01.2025 calling upon the encroachers to remove the blockage within 7 days of notice, failing which action would be taken in accordance with the Rules. Since no action is taken by respondent No.3 till date to implement the order dated 29.10.2024, the petitioners are before this Court.

¶31

3. Learned AGA representing the State submits that, if reasonable time is granted, respondent No.3 would undertake to implement the order dated 29.10.2024.

¶32

4. Under the circumstances, I pass the following:

¶33

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8503 WP No. 102098 of 2025

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

ORDER

¶36

i) The petition is allowed.

¶37

ii) A writ of mandamus is issued directing respondent No.3 to implement the order bearing No.LND/189561/24-25 vide Annexure-E within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶38

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

¶39

Kmv CT-MCK

Shri Yankappa L Kotabagi v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Yankappa L Kotabagi v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shreedevi W/O Yamunappa Basarihal Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Smt. Sangeetha Prabhakar Narvekar Vs Prabhakar Mahadev Amble

Mallayya S/O Basayya Naduvinmane Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Smt.Alka W/O Chandrahas Dhumal Vs the Under Secretary

Chandrashekar Sannu Gonda Vs the State of Karnataka

Tangevva W/O Bhimappa Yaradetti Vs Siddappa S/O Mahadev Yaradetti