Disposed

Sri Manjunath R v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Jan 2026WP/34750/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the 2nd respondent Tahasildar for failing to act on an application for mutation entry. The Court directed the Tahasildar to expeditiously process the application, verify details in the RTC, identify legal heirs, issue notices, and pass orders within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Tahasildar to consider the application, verify records, identify legal heirs, issue notices, and pass orders within two months.

Sri Manjunath R Vs State of Karnataka — Landlord and Tenant | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:88 WP No. 34750 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO.34750 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI. MANJUNATH R S/O LATE RAMAIAH AGE ABOUT 40 YEARS R/A NO.391/1 MANJU NILAYA, 7^TH MAIN, T DASARAHALLI BHUVANESHWARI NAGAR DASARAHALLI BENGALURU – 560 057

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. B. N. MAHESH CHANDRA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MANIKANTA H B., ADVOCATE)

¶13

Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

AND:

¶15

STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT M S BUILDING BENGALURU – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

¶16

THE TAHSILDAR YELAHANKA TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT – 560 064

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. SHAMANTH NAIK., HCGP)

¶19

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC:88 WP No. 34750 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR SUCH OTHER ORDER / WRIT DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.2 TO CHANGE THE KHATHA AND OTHER REVENUE RECORDS IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER IN SY.NO.45/3 IN THARABANAHALLI VILLAGE, HESARGHATTA TALUK, YELAHANKA TALUK FOR AN EXTENT OF 0-9 1/4 GUNTAS BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION DATED 09/11/2022 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE – F AND ETC

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

Learned High Court Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents.

¶27

The grievance of the petitioner is that the 2^nd respondent - Tahasildar has failed to consider the application filed by the petitioner at Annexure-F dated 09.11.2022, where the petitioner sought for mutation entry in the place of his father, whose name is reflected in the RTC in respect of 9 guntas and 4 annas in Survey No.45/3 of Tarabannahalli, Hesargatta Hobli, Yelahanka Taluk. It is pointed out that the petitioner's father Sri

¶28

¶29

NC: 2026:KHC:88 WP No. 34750 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

Ramaiah, who is the Khathedar died on 11.05.2014 which

¶32

is evidenced by the death certificate at Annexure-D.

¶33

Having regard to the contentions of the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that the 2^nd respondent - Tahasildar, Yelahanka Taluk, is duty bound to consider the application filed by the petitioner and pass necessary orders in accordance with law. The Tahasildar cannot receive the application and keep quiet without passing orders.

¶34

Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of with a specific direction to the respondent No.2 – Tahasildar, Yelahanka Taluk, to consider the application given by the petitioner, find out as to whether the name of the petitioner's father is reflected in the RTC and find out as to who are the other legal representatives left behind by Sri Ramaiah, issue notice to all concerned and thereafter pass necessary orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of

¶35

¶36

NC: 2026:KHC:88 WP No. 34750 of 2025

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this

¶39

order.

¶40

Ordered accordingly.

¶41

Sd/(R DEVDAS) JUDGE

¶42

KLY

Sri Manjunath R v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Manjunath R v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri H T Mariyappa Vs the State of Karnataka

The State of Karnataka Vs H B Munivenkatappa

Dr Gopala a Vs Karnataka State Eligibility Test (Kset) Center

Sri Murthy G Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri Bette Gowda Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Ramakrishna G N Vs the State of Karnataka