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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach the Deputy Commissioner (second appeal under Section 50 of the Act); interim protection granted - no precipitative action for dispossession or change of revenue entries for four weeks, and the Deputy Commissioner to consider any interim application and protect the petitioner's interest till disposal of the appeal.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition against the Assistant Commissioner's cancellation of the petitioner's land grant should be entertained, given the preliminary objection that an efficacious alternative remedy of second appeal under Section 50 of the Act lies before the Deputy Commissioner. +1 more

Court's answer

Having regard to the availability of an efficacious and alternative remedy to the petitioner in terms of Section 50 of the Act (second appeal before the Deputy Commissioner), the writ petition stands disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Deputy Commissioner.

Ratio / Principle

No precipitative action shall be taken against the petitioner for dispossession or for change of revenue entries for a period of four weeks, to enable the petitioner to approach the Deputy Commissioner.

Key takeaways

If an application for interim order is filed by the petitioner, the Deputy Commissioner shall consider the same and pass necessary orders protecting the interest of the petitioner till disposal of the appeal.ratio¶40

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (Art. 226) by a 65-year-old grant-holder of Kotigana Village, Belur Taluk, Hassan District, challenging Annex-A order dated 27.09.2025 of the Assistant Commissioner, Sakaleshpura Sub Division (Case No. LNDRUC/064/2025), cancelling the grant made earlier in his favour, passed invoking Rule 108 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966 and Section 94 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. On the Additional Government Advocate's preliminary objection, the Court found an efficacious and alternative remedy of second appeal under Section 50 of the Act before the Deputy Commissioner, and disposed of the writ petition reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Deputy Commissioner. Interim protection was granted: no precipitative action for dispossession or change of revenue entries for four weeks, and any interim application filed before the Deputy Commissioner is to be considered, protecting the petitioner's interest till disposal of the appeal.

NC: 2026:KHC:1519 WP No. 38991 of 2025

1 -

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 38991 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)

BETWEEN:

SRI NAGARAJU S/O DYAVEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT KOTIGANA VILLAGE, AREHALLI HOBLI, BELUR TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115

…PETITIONER

(BY SMT. NANDINI B., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. BHARGAV G., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL REVENUE SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN - 573 201

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER SAKALESHPURA SUB-DIVISION, SAKALESHPURA, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 134

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1519 WP No. 38991 of 2025

HC-KAR

TAHSILDAR BELUR TALUK, BELUR, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR, AGA)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS, QUASH ANNX-A DTD. 27.09.2025 PASSED BY THE R-3 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SAKALESHAPURA SUB DIVISION VIDE CASE NO. LNDRUC/064/2025 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 impugned order is passed

by the Assistant Commissioner invoking Rule 108 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966 and Section 94 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act to cancel the grant made

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:1519 WP No. 38991 of 2025

HC-KAR

earlier in favour of the petitioner. However, a second appeal remedy is available under Section 50 of the Act, before the Deputy Commissioner.

Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that action has been initiated by the Assistant Commissioner at the instance of the Deputy Commissioner and therefore, it will be a futile exercise going before the Deputy Commissioner.

Even otherwise, it is submitted that if the petitioner is to go before the Deputy Commissioner, interim protection should be given in favour of the petitioner.

Having regard to the availability of an efficacious and alternative remedy to the petitioner in terms of Section 50 of the Act, the writ petition stands disposed of , reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Deputy Commissioner. However, no precipitative action shall be taken against the petitioner for dispossession or

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1519 WP No. 38991 of 2025

HC-KAR

for change of revenue entries for a period of four weeks to

enable the petitioner to approach the Deputy Commissioner.

If an application for interim order is filed by the petitioner, the Deputy Commissioner shall accordingly consider the same and pass necessary orders, protecting

the interest of the petitioner till disposal of the appeal.

Sd/(R DEVDAS) JUDGE

rv List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17