Smt Gowramma Vs State of Karnataka

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, ZILLADALITHA BHAVAN, BEERASANDRA VILLAGE, KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU - 562 110.

¶23

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DODDABALLAPUR SUB-DIVISION, DODDABALLAPUR, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU - 561 203.

¶24

THE TAHSILDAR, HOSAKOTE TALUK, HOSAKOTE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU - 562 114.

¶25

…..RESPONDENTS

¶26

(BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP)

¶27

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 12^TH SEPTEMBER, 2025 PASSED IN CASE NO.LND(A)CR:309/2024 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4TAHSILDAR, HOSAKOTE VIDE ANNEXURE-L AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.4 TO FORTHWITH COMPLY WITH THE ORDER DATED 19^TH MARCH, 2018 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER IN CASE NO.RA(H)97/2017-18 VIDE ANNEXURE-H; AND ETC.

¶28

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:31791 WP NO.14916 OF 2026

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

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

¶31

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

¶32

ORAL ORDER

¶33

In this petition, petitioners are challenging the order dated 12^th September, 2025 (Annexure-L) passed by the respondent No.4 in Case No.LND(A)CR:309/2024; inter alia sought for a direction to the respondent No.4 to forthwith comply with the order dated 19^th March, 2018 (Annexure-H) passed by the respondent No.3-Assistant Commissioner in Case No.RA(H)97/2017-18.

¶34

Heard Sri. Bipin Hegde, learned counsel on behalf of Sri. Karthik V., appearing for petitioners and Sri. Spoorthy Hegde N., learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondents.

¶35

Sri. Bipin Hegde, learned counsel appearing for petitioners invited the attention of the Court to the order dated 04^th September, 2024 (Annexure-K) passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.7170 of 2023 c/w Writ Petition No.22576 of 2022 and submitted that the matter was remitted by this Court to the competent authority to consider the claim of the

¶36

4 -

¶37

NC: 2026:KHC:31791 WP NO.14916 OF 2026

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

petitioners in the light of order dated 19^th March, 2018 (Annexure-H). Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners herein have filed contempt petition before this Court in C.C.C. No.1079 of 2025 and the said contempt petition was disposed of on 01^st April, 2026 (Annexure-M). Therefore, it is submitted that the impugned order has been passed by the respondent No.4, who has no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order dehors the order passed by the respondent No.3 dated 19^th March, 2018 (Annexure-H). Accordingly, he sought for interference of this Court.

¶40

Per contra, Sri. Spoorthy Hegde N., learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondents submits that, pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the respondent No.4 has considered the entire proceedings on merits and passed the impugned order. Accordingly, he sought for dismissal of the petition.

¶41

In the light of submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on careful consideration of the order dated 19^th March, 2018 (Annexure-H) passed by the respondent No.3, the same would indicate that the direction

¶42

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:31791 WP NO.14916 OF 2026

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

was issued to the competent authority to mutate the name of the petitioners herein in respect of the subject land by securing all the original records. Thereafter, the order has been passed by the competent authority under Section 71 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act allotting subject land for Ashraya Scheme and the said order was questioned before this Court in Writ Petition No.7170 of 2023 c/w Writ Petition No.22576 of 2022. This Court, by order dated 04^th September, 2024 (Annexure-K) disposed of the petition. The operative portion of the said order reads as under:

¶45

O R D E R

¶46

(i) W.P.No.7170/2023 is allowed and the impugned order dated 28.02.2023 passed by the respondent No.2/Deputy Commissioner as per AnnexureA is quashed and set-aside;

¶47

(ii) W.P.No.22576/2022 is allowed-in-part. The respondents shall consider the recommendation made by the respondent No.2/Assistant Commissioner as per Annexure-J and after verifying the records shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law;

¶48

(iii) This order will not come in the way of the competent authority to hold an enquiry to ascertain whether the grant is genuine;

¶49

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:31791 WP NO.14916 OF 2026

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

(iv) This exercise shall be accomplished within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order;

¶52

(v) Pending I.As., if any, do not survive for consideration and stand disposed of accordingly."

¶53

It appears that, in pursuance of the aforesaid order

¶54

passed by this court, the competent authority has not taken any decision and as such, petitioners filed contempt petition in C.C.C. No.1079 of 2025 before this Court and in the interregnum period , the respondent No.4 passed the impugned order dated 12^th September, 2025 (Annexure-L) to avoid the orders against him in the contempt proceedings. Perusal of the impugned order dated 12^th September, 2025 (Annexure-L) passed by the respondent No.4, the same would indicate that, a fair opportunity has not been extended and no notice has been issued to the petitioners and that apart, the impugned order has been passed, without considering the earlier order passed by the respondent No.3 dated 19^th March, 2018 (Annexure-H). In that view of the matter, I find force in the submission made by learned counsel appearing for petitioners. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the matter requires reconsideration by the respondent No.4. Accordingly, the

¶55

7 -

¶56

NC: 2026:KHC:31791 WP NO.14916 OF 2026

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

matter is remitted back to the respondent No.4-Tahsildar to consider the issue afresh and take decision in the matter in terms of order dated 04^th September, 2024 (Annexure-K) passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.7170 of 2023 C/w Writ Petition No.22576 of 2022, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order. It is made clear that, while considering the claim of petitioners, the respondent No.4 shall take in to account the order dated 19^th March, 2018 (AnnexureH) passed by the respondent No.3. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of.

¶59

Sd/(E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE

¶60

ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 72

Smt Gowramma v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Gowramma v. 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

Lakshmamma Vs Government of Karnataka

Umadevi Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Rangegowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr B a Nagaraju Vs the Tahsildar

Sri Kenchegowda @ Chikkonnu Vs State of Karnataka

The Board of Directors and Vs Hanumanna M