Disposed¶51

Smt. Padmavathi v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC3 Jun 2026WP/38173/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court; writ petition; direction to consider representation; mutation restoration; IHC 2/1987-88; Annexure-G; Sy No.40; 4 acres; Varadhanahalli Village; Kasaba Hobli; Doddaballapura Taluk; Tahsildar; Annexure-A series; four months; Articles 226 and 227; KLR-RES; WP No. 38173 of 2025; E.S. Indiresh J.; disposed; no opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.2 (Tahsildar, Doddaballapura Taluk) to consider the representations produced at Annexure-A series in accordance with law within the outer limit of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order; no opinion expressed on the merits; petition disposed of with these observations. ¶51

Smt. Padmavathi Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:26093 WP No. 38173 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 38173 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT. PADMAVATHI, D/O LATE S.P.SUJATHA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS,

¶10

SMT. Y.K.SUMITHRA, W/O LATE Y.N.KANTHARAJA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,

¶11

SRI. Y.N. VISHWANATH, S/O LATE Y.B. NEELAKANTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,

¶12

SRI. Y.N.MAHESH, S/O LATE Y.B. NEELAKANTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,

¶13

Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

SMT. K.S.USHA, W/O K.V.SUDHAKAR, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,

¶15

SRI. Y.N. AMARNATH, S/O LATE Y.B. NEELAKANTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,

¶16

SRI. Y.K. NAVEEN, S/O LATE Y.N. KANTHARAJA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,

¶17

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:26093 WP No. 38173 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

SRI. Y.K. PRAVEEN, S/O LATE Y.N. KANTHARAJA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,

¶21

SRI. Y.V. PRUTHVI, S/O Y.N.VISHWANATH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,

¶22

SMT. Y.V. HARSHITHA, D/O Y.N.VISHWANATH, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,

¶23

SRI.Y.M. RAKSHITH, S/O Y.N. MAHESH, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,

¶24

SRI. Y.M. NITHESH, S/O Y.N. MAHESH, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,

¶25

MS. Y.A. SHEYASHI, D/O Y.N. AMARNATH, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,

¶26

SMT. Y.H. NEELASHRI, D/O Y.N. HARISH, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,

¶27

SRI. Y.N.HARISH, S/O Y.B. NEELAKANTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

¶28

SL.NO.1 TO 14 ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER SRI.Y.N. HARISH

¶29

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:26093 WP No. 38173 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

WHO IS PETITIONER NO.15

¶32

ALL ARE R/AT NO.16 DIVISION, DODDABALLAPURA TOWN, KALASIPALYA, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 561 203.

¶33

…PETITIONERS

¶34

(BY SRI. CHOKKAREDDY., ADVOCATE)

¶35

AND:

¶36

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY UNDER SECRETARY OF REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, AMBEDHKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶37

TAHSILDAR, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, DODDABALLAPURA - 561 203.

¶38

…RESPONDENTS

¶39

(BY SMT.B.P.RADHA, AGA)

¶40

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENT NO.2 FOR CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION AS ANX-A, A1, A2, A3 DATED 10.10.2025, 11.10.2016, 3.11.2018 AND 4.12.2023 RESTORE THE MUTATION IN IHC 2/1987-88 AS ANNX-G IN RESPECT OF THE SY NO.40 MEASURING 4 ACRES OF LAND SITUATED AT VARADHANAHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI DODDABALLAPURA TALUK BY ALLOWING THE WP.

¶41

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

¶42

¶43

NC: 2026:KHC:26093 WP No. 38173 of 2025

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

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

¶46

ORAL ORDER

¶47

Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents.

¶48

The grievance of the petitioners is that the

¶49

representations produced at Annexure-A series have not

¶50

been considered. In this regard, I am of the view that, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the respondent No.2 is hereby directed to consider the representations produced at Annexure-A series in accordance with law, within the outer limit of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶51

With these observations, the petition stands disposed

¶52

of.

¶53

SD/(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

¶54

Smt. Padmavathi v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Padmavathi 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

Sri Venkatesh D R Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt H P Vanajakshi Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Chandregowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.Basavaraju Vs the Principal Secretary

Sri Manohar M K Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri Jayarama a Vs State of Karnataka