Smt. Kariyamma Vs the Deputy Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

Smt. Kariyamma Vs the Deputy Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief on merits. Liberty reserved to the petitioners to approach the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal; the Additional Government Advocate permitted to file memo of appearance within four weeks; Office directed to return the original/certified copies to the petitioners retaining a copy for the file; notice to respondent Nos. 4 to 13 dispensed with.

Issue for consideration

Whether, in view of the amendment to Section 136(1) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 w.e.f. 10.01.2025, the petitioners are required to approach the Karnataka Revenue Appellate Tribunal against the impugned order passed by the Deputy Commissioner under Section 136(3) of the Act, rather than invoke the writ jurisdiction of the High Court.

Court's answer

The preliminary objection of the Additional Government Advocate was upheld: having regard to the amendment to Section 136(1) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 w.e.f. 10.01.2025, the petitioners must approach the Karnataka Revenue Appellate Tribunal to question the impugned order passed by the Deputy Commissioner under Section 136(3) of the Act. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed with liberty reserved to the petitioners to approach the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. (The Court also held notice to respondent Nos. 4 to 13 unnecessary.)

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka High Court (R Devdas J., oral order dated 28.08.2025 in W.P. No. 14387 of 2025 (KLR-RES)): On a preliminary objection raised by the Additional Government Advocate, the Court held that in view of the amendment to Section 136(1) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 with effect from 10.01.2025, the petitioners had to approach the Karnataka Revenue Appellate Tribunal to question the impugned order passed by the Deputy Commissioner under Section 136(3) of the Act. The writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the Deputy Commissioner's order dated 04.03.2025 in R.P.No. 9/2021 c/w R.P.79/2020 (Annex-A) and the Assistant Commissioner's order dated 11.03.2020 in RA(BNA) No. 123/2014-15 (Annex-B), was dismissed at the preliminary hearing stage with liberty to approach the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. Notice to respondent Nos. 4 to 13 was dispensed with; the AGA was permitted to file a memo of appearance within four weeks; original/certified copies were directed to be returned to the petitioners.

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:33783 WP No. 14387 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 14387 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)

BETWEEN:

SMT. KARIYAMMA W/O LATE PILLA DODDANNA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,

SRI. PATALAPPA S/O LATE PILLA DODDANNA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,

SRI. MUNIKRISHNA S/O LATE PILLA DODDANNA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

SMT. NIRMALA D/O LATE PILLA DODDANNA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,

ARE R/AT T.AGRAHARA VILLAGE, JALA HOBLI, YELAHANKA TALUK, BENGALURU - 562 157.

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. MURALI M, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G ROAD,

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:33783 WP No. 14387 of 2025

HC-KAR

BENGALURU - 560 009.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE NORTH SUB-DIVISION K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009.

THE TAHASILDAR, BENGALURU NORTH (ADDL) TALUK, NOW YEALAHANKA TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 064.

SMT. CHIKKAMMA W/O LATE HANUMANTHARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, R/AT NO.103, KAVERINAGAR, KSCB QUARTERS, LAGGERE, BENGALURU - 560 058.

SMT. TEJAMMA, W/O SIDDAPPA, AGED 56 YEARS, NO.113, MMN BUILDING, 1ST A MAIN, GANDHI SCHOOL ROAD, KAVAL BYRASANDRA, R.T. NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 032.

SMT. VENKATALAKSHMI, W/O LATE SHIVAKUMAR, D/O LATE HANUMANTHARYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO.112, MMN BUILDING, 1ST A MAIN, GANDHI SCHOOL ROAD, KAVAL BYRASANDRA, R.T. NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 032.

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:33783 WP No. 14387 of 2025

HC-KAR

SRI. LAKSHMINARAYANA, S/O LATE HANUMANTHARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, NO.113, MMN BUILDING, 1ST A MAIN, GANDHI SCHOOL ROAD, KAVAL BYRASANDRA, R.T. NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 032.

SMT. MANJULA, W/O RAMAKRISHNA, D/O LATE HANUMANTHARYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO.8, MUDDINAPALYA, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU - 562 159.

SMT. RUPA W/O KRISHNAPPA, D/O LATE HANUMANTHARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT NO.91, GANDHI SCHOOL ROAD, KAVAL BYRASANDRA, R.T. NAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 032.

SRI. RAJA KUMAR, S/O LATE DODAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS

SRI. SUBBA S/O LATE DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,

SMT. PARVATHAMMA D/O LATE DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:33783 WP No. 14387 of 2025

HC-KAR

13. SRI CHIKKANNA

S/O LATE APPAYANNA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, NO.10 TO 13 ARE R/AT TARAHUNASE, T. AGRAHARA NOW YELAHANKA TALUK, BENGALURU - 562 157.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1 TO R3)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS ON THE FILE OF R-1 IN R.P.NO. 9/2021 AND RECORDS FROM R-2 IN RA(BNA) NO.129/2014-15. QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R-1 DTD. 04.03.2025 IN R.P.NO. 9/2021 C/W R.P.79/2020 PASSED BY R-1 VIDE ANNX-A AND ORDER DTD. 11.03.2020 PASSED IN RA (BNA) NO. 123/201415 BY R-2 VIDE ANNX-B 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

Learned Additional Government Advocate takes

notice for respondents No.1 to 3. Notice to respondent Nos.4 to 13 are not necessary for the following reasons.

Learned Additional Government Advocate raises a preliminary objection that having regard to the amendment brought to Section 136(1) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, w.e.f., 10.01.2025, the

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:33783 WP No. 14387 of 2025

HC-KAR

petitioners will have to approach the Karnataka Revenue Appellate Tribunal questioning the impugned order passed by the Deputy Commissioner under Section 136(3) of the Act.

Upholding the submissions made by the learned Additional Government Advocate, the writ petition stands dismissed while reserving liberty to the petitioners to approach the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal.

Learned Additional Government Advocate is

permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today.

Office is hereby directed to return the

original/certified copies to the petitioners while retaining a copy of the same for the file.

Sd/(R DEVDAS) JUDGE

rv List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15 CT: BHK