Sri Nagaraju v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC1 Sept 2025WP/20541/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WP No. 20541 of 2025 (KLR-RES); High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru; decided 01-09-2025; R Devdas J; NC: 2025:KHC:34072. Keywords: saguvali chit; kimath payment 1995; grant regularisation by Committee; mutation of grantee name in revenue records; omission of grantee name; Tahsildar Hosakote Taluk; Deputy Commissioner Bengaluru Rural; Assistant Commissioner Doddaballpura; representation dated 27.08.2024; Articles 226 and 227; KLR-RES.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.4-Tahsildar, Hosakote Taluk, to verify the records regarding the Committee's regularisation order and issuance of the saguvali chit and, if confirmed, to mutate the petitioner's name in the revenue records after collecting the necessary fee in accordance with law, within two months of receipt of the order. ¶¶35

Sri Nagaraju Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶35

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent No.4-Tahsildar should verify the records and, upon finding that an order of regularisation was passed by the Committee and a saguvali chit was issued in favour of the petitioner, mutate and enter the petitioner's name in the revenue records.

¶¶35

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.4-Tahsildar, Hosakote Taluk, to verify the records and find out whether an order of regularisation was passed by the Committee and whether a saguvali chit was issued in favour of the petitioner.

¶¶35

Ratio / Principle

If it is found from the records that the facts stated by the petitioner are true, the Tahsildar shall proceed to mutate and enter the petitioner's name in the revenue records after collecting the necessary fee in accordance with law.

¶¶36

Key takeaways

The entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶¶36
The learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks.obiter¶¶41

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (R Devdas, J), 01-09-2025, WP No. 20541 of 2025 (KLR-RES), NC: 2025:KHC:34072 — Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 by a grant-holder who paid kimath in 1995 and obtained a saguvali chit dated 04.11.1995, but whose name was not entered in the revenue records although the names of other grantees were entered. Disposed of with a direction to respondent No.4-Tahsildar, Hosakote Taluk, to verify the records and ascertain whether the Committee passed an order of regularisation and whether the saguvali chit was issued; if the facts are confirmed, to mutate and enter the petitioner's name in the revenue records after collecting the necessary fee in accordance with law, completing the exercise within two months of receipt of the order. AGA permitted to file memo of appearance within four weeks.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:34072 WP No. 20541 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO.20541 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI NAGARAJU SON OF THIRUMALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, RESIDING AT VENKATAPURA VILLAGE, HOSAKOTE TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, PIN – 562 114

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. SRINIVASA T. P., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

¶14

Digitally signed by DHARMALINGAM Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BEERASANDRA, DEVANAHALLI, BENGALURU-BANGALORE RURAL, PIN – 562 110.

¶16

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DODDABALLPURA SUB-DIVISION, DODDABALLPURA. BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT,

¶17

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:34072 WP No. 20541 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

PIN – 561 203

¶21

THE TAHSILDAR, HOSAKOTE TALUK, HOSAKOTE, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, PIN – 562 114.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA)

¶24

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND THE TAHSILDAR, HOSAKOTE TALUK, TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 27.08.2024 ANNEXURE E TO THE WRIT PETITION AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE.

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

Learned Additional Government Advocate takes

¶29

notice for the respondents.

¶30

It is the contention of the petitioner that

¶31

pursuant to the grant made in favour of the petitioner he

¶32

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:34072 WP No. 20541 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

paid kimath in the year 1995, as can be seen at AnnexureB. Thereafter, saguvali chit was also issued in favour of the petitioner at Annexure-C dated 04.11.1995. However, the name of the petitioner is not entered in the revenue records although the name of the other grantees are entered in the revenue records.

¶35

The writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to respondent No.4-Tahsildar, Hosakote Taluk, to verify the records and find out if an order of regularisation was passed by the Committee and whether Saguvali chit

¶36

was issued in favour of the petitioner. If it is found from the records that the facts stated hereinabove are true, then the Tahsildar shall proceed to mutate and enter the name of the petitioner in the revenue records, after collecting the necessary fee in accordance with law. The entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶37