Disposed¶32

Sri. Vinod Kumar Gowda B. K. v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC28 Oct 2025WP/19492/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ of mandamus; Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India; computerized RTC entry; RTC mutation of granted land; Grant Certificate dated 17.08.1997; phodi and durasti; akarband; RTC extracts; Tahsildar Chikkaballapura Taluk; Bidaganahalli Village, Nandi Hobli; Sy.No.110; representation dated 25.05.2013 (Annexure-A); representation dated 02.04.2016 (Annexure-G); Vinod Kumar Gowda B.K.; State of Karnataka Department of Revenue; NC: 2025:KHC:43204; WP No. 19492 of 2016.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Tahsildar (respondent No.2) to consider the petitioner's representations dated 25.05.2013 and 02.04.2016 (Annexures-A and G) in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order; writ petition disposed of accordingly. ¶32

Sri. Vinod Kumar Gowda B. K. Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

NC: 2025:KHC:43204 WP No. 19492 of 2016

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 19492 OF 2016 (KLR-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI. VINOD KUMAR GOWDA B.K. S/O. KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDENT OF VENKATAGIRI KOTE VILLAGE, VIJAYAPURA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-563 135.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. PRASHANTH P.N, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶16

THE THASILDAR CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562 101.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. NEELAKANTAPPA K PUJAR, HCGP FOR R1 & R2)

¶19

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DTD.2.4.2016 BEING

¶20

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:43204 WP No. 19492 of 2016

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

ANNEX-G ON THE SCHEDULE LAND BEARING SY.NO.110, OLD NO.46, BIDAGANAHALLI VILLAGE, NANDI HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

This petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus to the Tahsildar - respondent No.2 to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 25.05.2013 and 02.04.2016 vide Annexures-A and G respectively to enter the name of the petitioner in the computerized RTC.

¶27

The grievance of the petitioner is that the land bearing Sy.No.110 (Old Sy.No.48) measuring 1 acre 3 guntas situated at Bidaganahalli Village, Nandi Hobli, Chikkaballapura Taluk, was granted to the petitioner under Grant Certificate dated 17.08.1997 and ever since, he was in possession of the same. Thereafter, the revenue authorities had conducted phodi and durasti of the subject land. However, they failed to enter the name of the petitioner in the computerized RTC, despite

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:43204 WP No. 19492 of 2016

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

submitting representations to them. As such, he is before this Court.

¶31

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

¶32

and having perused the materials on record i.e., the akarband, RTC extracts, etc., this Court is of the view that the prayer in this petitioner requires to be granted. Accordingly, the Tahsildar - respondent No.2 is directed to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 25.05.2013 and 02.04.2016 vide Annexures-A and G respectively in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶33

SD/(RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE

¶34

PKS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32

Sri. Vinod Kumar Gowda B. K. v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Vinod Kumar Gowda B. K. 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

State by Honnali Police Station Vs Halasiddappa

Manjunatha G Vs Sri Muniraja

Smt Shantala Alias Nagalakshmi P C Vs Smt Rathnamma

M.S. Ramesha Vs Sannahydegowda

Sri Lokesh @ Cable Lokesh Vs Sri Raghunathan Pillai Alias Raghu

Smt Kanthamma Vs the Deputy Commissioner