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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of without quashing the show-cause notice: respondent No.1 directed to consider the petitioner's reply and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, and restrained until such consideration from tampering with, recalling or cancelling the Khata standing in the petitioner's name; I.A.No.1/2025 rejected.

Issue for consideration

Whether the show-cause notice No.NASANE/SIBBANDI/CR/308/2025-26 dated 16.10.2025 issued by respondent No.1, proposing cancellation of the Khata in the petitioner's name, is liable to be quashed. +2 more

Court's answer

No indulgence is warranted with the impugned show-cause notice, i.e., the prayer to quash it is not granted; the writ petition is accordingly disposed of with directions.

Ratio / Principle

If the petitioner has submitted a reply to the notice issued by respondent No.1, respondent No.1 is bound to consider the reply and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law; respondent No.1 cannot initiate any action to cancel the Khata that stood in the name of the petitioner even before the reply submitted by her is considered.

Key takeaways

Respondent No.1 is directed to consider the reply submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders; until such consideration, respondent No.1 shall not tamper with, recall or cancel the Khata that stands in the name of the petitioner.ratio¶41
In view of the disposal of the main petition, I.A.No.1/2025 does not survive for consideration and the same stands rejected.ratio¶44

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (LB-RES), WP No. 34373 of 2025, High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, decided 27.11.2025 by Justice R. Nataraj (oral order; NC: 2025:KHC:49395). Filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by Smt. Chikkahanumakka against the Municipal Commissioner, Nelamangala Municipal Council and the State of Karnataka, seeking quashing of show-cause notice No.NASANE/SIBBANDI/CR/308/2025-26 dated 16.10.2025 (Annexure-C) proposing cancellation of the Khata issued in her name for properties in Survey Nos.1/1, 1/2, 1/3 and 36 of Basavanahalli Village, and mandamus to respondent No.2 to continue and maintain the existing E-Khata. Held: since the petitioner had already submitted a reply to the notice, respondent No.1 is bound to consider the reply and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law and cannot initiate cancellation of the Khata before doing so; no indulgence shown to the impugned show-cause notice; respondent No.1 directed to consider the reply and pass appropriate orders, and restrained until then from tampering with, recalling or cancelling the Khata; petition disposed of; I.A.No.1/2025 rejected.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49395 WP No. 34373 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 34373 OF 2025 (LB-RES)

BETWEEN:

SMT. CHIKKAHANUMAKKA W/O. LATE ANJINAPPA, AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, R/O. BASAVANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562123.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SARAVANA S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER NELAMANGALA MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, NELAMANGALA, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT- 562123.

Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPT. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAMESH KUMAR R.V., ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1;

SRI. H.K.KENCHEGOWDA, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49395 WP No. 34373 of 2025

HC-KAR

RELATING TO THE SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE NO.NASANE/SIBBANDI/CR/308/2025-26, DATED 16.10.2025 AS PER ANNEXURE-C, ISSUED BY 1^ST RESPONDENT AND QUASH THE SAME AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has challenged a show-cause notice bearing No.NASANE/SIBBANDI/CR/308/2025-26, dated 16.10.2025 issued to her by respondent No.1. She has also sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct respondent No.2 to continue and maintain the existing E-Khata in respect of the properties formed in Survey No.1/1, 1/2, 1/3 and 36 of Basavanahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk.

(i) The petitioner contends that the land in Survey Nos.1/1, 1/2, 1/3 and 36 of Basavanahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk was converted for nonagricultural residential purposes in terms of an order of the Deputy Commissioner bearing No.J.J¯ï.J£ï(£É)J¸À.Dgï 24/2005-06

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:49395 WP No. 34373 of 2025

HC-KAR

dated 18.06.2005. Pursuant to such conversion, the petitioner

and her family members are in possession of plots formed in the aforesaid land. The Grama Panchayath after verifying the conversion order and supporting documents, purportedly issued individual Khatas in the names of the petitioner and her family members about 20 years ago, and the petitioner and others are paying property tax since then.

(ii) It is stated that the Panchayat area was absorbed into the limits of City Municipal Council, Nelamangala in the year 2020 and the existing Khatas maintained by the panchayath were migrated into the Municipal records. The State Government vide order dated 17.02.2025 introduced the E-Khata and amended the relevant provisions of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 permitting regularisation and issuance of Khata even in respect of unauthorised layouts and properties upon payment of the prescribed fees and taxes. The petitioner claimed that she submitted all necessary documents including registered sale deeds, revenue receipts and Aadhaar cards, and paid all dues as fixed by the State Government. Respondent No.1 thereafter issued 'B' Khata to the petitioners in respect of

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:49395 WP No. 34373 of 2025

HC-KAR

the properties in their possession. However respondent No.1 issued a show-cause notice dated 16.10.2025 alleging that Khatas made out in the name of the petitioner was illegal and called upon the petitioner to show-cause why the Khata should not be cancelled. The petitioner submitted a detailed reply explaining the reasons against the cancellation of the Khatha already made out in her name. The petitioner alleges that despite submission of such reply, the respondent authorities are attempting to take coercive action. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.

The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the above contentions and submitted that the Khatha which stood in the name of the petitioner and her family members from the year 2005 is now sought to be disturbed by the impugned show cause notice. He therefore prays that the impugned show-cause notice be set at nought.

If the petitioner has submitted a reply to the notice issued by respondent No.1, the latter is bound to consider the reply and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Respondent No.1 cannot initiate any action to cancel the Khata

5 -

NC: 2025:KHC:49395 WP No. 34373 of 2025

HC-KAR

that stood in the name of the petitioner even before the reply submitted by her is considered.

In that view of the matter, no indulgence is warranted with the impugned show-cause notice. However, respondent No.1 is directed to consider the reply submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders. Until such consideration, respondent No.1 shall not tamper or recall or cancel the Khata that stands in the name of the petitioner.

The learned Additional Government Advocate for

respondent No.2 and Mr. R.V.Rameshkumar are permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of 10 days.

In view of disposal of main petition, I.A.No.1/2025

does not survive for consideration and the same stands rejected.

Sd/(R. NATARAJ) JUDGE

HJ

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31