Sri Muniyellappa S v Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Sri Muniyellappa S v Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to raise a challenge to the order passed by the Tahsildar before the Assistant Commissioner in accordance with law; the learned Additional Government Advocate was permitted to file a memo of appearance within two weeks.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition praying for directions to Respondent No.4/the Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluk, to consider the petitioner's re-presentations dated 17.02.2025 (Annexure-F series) is sustainable, given that the Tahsildar has already passed an order dated 04.04.2024 (Annexure-E) rejecting the petitioner's claim.

Court's answer

The Court found substance in the learned Additional Government Advocate's preliminary objection that the writ petition merely seeks consideration of representations notwithstanding that the Tahsildar had already rejected the petitioner's claim by order dated 04.04.2024.

Ratio / Principle

Since an order has already been passed by the Tahsildar rejecting the petitioner's claim, the petitioner cannot be permitted to give further representations to the Tahsildar.

Key takeaways

If the petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the Tahsildar, the avenue open to the petitioner is to approach the Assistant Commissioner and raise a challenge to that order.ratio¶4
The private respondents who are parties to the order passed by the Tahsildar were not made parties in the writ proceedings.obiter¶4

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No.27193/2025 (KLR-RES) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, decided 06.01.2026 by R Devdas, J. Petitioner Sri. Muniyellappa S.V. sought directions to Respondent No.4/Tahasildar, Bengaluru North Taluk, to expeditiously consider his re-presentations dated 17.02.2025 (Annexure-F series). The Additional Government Advocate objected that the Tahsildar had already rejected the petitioner's claim by order dated 04.04.2024 (Annexure-E) in Proceedings No.RRT(H)CR:962/2023-24, passed following this Court's order dated 31.05.2022 disposing of W.P. No.23079/2021 (filed by the petitioner's sons regarding alleged mistakes in the RTC). The Court held that once the Tahsildar has decided, further representations to the Tahsildar cannot be pressed, and the remedy is to challenge the Tahsildar's order before the Assistant Commissioner; it also observed that the private respondents to the Tahsildar's order were not impleaded. The petition was disposed of with liberty to move the Assistant Commissioner; the AGA was permitted two weeks to file a memo of appearance.

NC: 2026:KHC:328 WP No. 27193 of 2025

1 -

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 27193 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)

BETWEEN:

SRI. MUNIYELLAPPA S.V. S/O LATE PATEL VENKATARAMANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, RESIDING AT SRIRAMANAHALLI VILLAGE, HESARAGHATTA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK - 560 088.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SHRIKANTH BADARADINNI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE RE/BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, B.R.AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN, KANDAYA BHAVAN, BENGALURU - 560 009.

THE ASST. COMMISSIONER NORTH SUB-DIVISION, KANDAYA BHAVAN, BENGALURU - 560 009.

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:328 WP No. 27193 of 2025

HC-KAR

4. THE TAHASILDAR

BENGALURU NORTH TALUK (YELAHANKA), YELAHANKA, BENGALURU - 560 064.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR, AGA)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (I) DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS NO.4/THE TAHSILDAR, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, TO CONSIDER THE RE-PRESENTATIONS (ANNEXUREF3) SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER, DATED 17.02.2025 EXPEDITIOUSLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ETC.,

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY

HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

ORAL ORDER

Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for

all the respondents.

Learned Additional Government Advocate raises a preliminary objection that the petitioner is seeking directions to

the Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluk, to consider the representation given by the petitioner at Annexure-F series,

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:328 WP No. 27193 of 2025

HC-KAR

despite an order being passed by the Tahsildar at Annexure-E dated 04.04.2024, rejecting the claim of the petitioner.

There is substance in the contention of the learned

Additional Government Advocate, it is seen from the documents produced by the writ petitioner that earlier, the petitioner's sons had filed writ petition No.23079/2021 seeking directions to the Tahsildar to rectify the alleged mistakes in the RTC. This Court disposed of the writ petition by order dated 31.05.2022, directing the Tahsildar to consider the grievance of the petitioner therein and also take into consideration all the documents of the petitioner in support of their claim and pass necessary orders. Accordingly, the Tahsildar passed an order in proceedings bearing No.RRT(H)CR:962/2023-24 dated 04.04.2024 rejecting the claim of the petitioners.

That being the position, the petitioner cannot be permitted to give further representations to the Tahsildar. If the petitioner is aggrieved of the order passed by the Tahsildar, the avenue open for the petitioner is to approach the Assistant Commissioner raising a challenge to the order passed by the

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:328 WP No. 27193 of 2025

HC-KAR

Tahsildar. It is also seen that the private respondents who are parties in the order passed by the Tahsildar are not made parties in these proceedings.

In that view of the matter, the writ petition stands disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner to raise a challenge to the order passed by the Tahsildar before the Assistant Commissioner in accordance with law.

Ordered accordingly.

Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to

file memo of appearance within a period of two weeks from today.

Sd/(R DEVDAS) JUDGE

rv

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19