Dismissed¶41

Sri Hanuma Bhovi v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC18 Sept 2026WP/19354/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Short procedural dismissal order; no substantive ratio. Keywords: High Court of Karnataka; WP No. 19354 of 2025 (KLR-RES); Hanuma Bhovi v. State of Karnataka; Deputy Commissioner Hassan District; Assistant Commissioner and Tahasildar Arakalagud Taluk; Revision Petition No.127/2023-24; order dated 02.12.2024 (Annexure-A); Articles 226 & 227; dismissal for non-compliance of office objections; office objections dated 10.04.2026; R Devdas J; land revenue/res matter; no precedents cited or treated; citeable only for the fact of dismissal by default, not for any legal proposition.

What did the court decide?

Office objections having not been complied with till 24.04.2026, the writ petition stands dismissed for non-compliance of office objections. ¶41

Sri Hanuma Bhovi Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:22527 WP No. 19354 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 19354 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI HANUMA BHOVI S/O.LATE KALA BHAOVI AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, R/AT AGRAHARA VILLAGE, DODDAMAGGE HOBLI, ARAKALAGUDU TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT- 573102.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. MANIKANTA H B., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA by JUANITA REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, THEJESWINI Location: HIGH DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, COURT OF BENGALURU 560 001, KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶15

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN-573201.

¶16

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ARAKALAUGUDU TALUK, ARAKALAGUDU, HASSAN DISTRICT-573102.

¶17

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:22527 WP No. 19354 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

THE TAHASILDAR ARAKALAGUDU TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT- 573102.

¶21

SRI. ANDANI SHETTY, S/O LATE NINGANASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

¶22

SRI VIJAYENDRA S/O LATE NINGANASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,

¶23

SRI GOVINDEGOWDA S/O SUBBEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,

¶24

SMT NAGAMMA W/O LATE KRISHNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

¶25

SRI RAJEGOWDA S/O SANNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,

¶26

SRI N S PRADEEP S/O SANNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,

¶27

RESPONDENTS NO.5 TO 10 ARE R/AT AGRAHARA VILLAGE, DODDAMAGGE HOBLI, ARAKALAHUDU TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573102.

¶28

…RESPONDENTS

¶29

(BY SRI.SHAMANTH NAIK., HCGP FOR R1 TO R4)

¶30

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:22527 WP No. 19354 of 2025

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 02.12.2024 IN REVISION PETITION NO.127/2023-24 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,

¶33

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

¶34

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶35

ORAL ORDER

¶36

On 10.04.2026, the following order was passed:

¶37

“Finally, two weeks' time is granted for compliance of office objections.

¶38

If office objections are not complied, list this matter for dismissal on 24.04.2026.”