Dismissed¶40

Smt Y L Nagarathna v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC9 Feb 2026WP/39373/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka Land Revenue Act 1964; Section 136(1) amendment w.e.f. 10.01.2025; Section 136(3); Karnataka Appellate Tribunal as alternative remedy; Deputy Commissioner Chamarajanagar order R.A.67/2022-23 dated 22.05.2025 (Annexure-H); writ petition dismissed maintaining preliminary objection; liberty to approach KAT; four-week restraint on precipitative action; Justice R Devdas; WP No. 39373 of 2025 (KLR-RES); decided 09.02.2026.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to the petitioners to approach the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal; respondents directed not to take precipitative action for four weeks; Learned High Court Government Pleader permitted to file memo of appearance within four weeks; Office directed to return original documents/certified copies to the petitioners retaining copies on file. ¶40

Smt Y L Nagarathna Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶40

Issue for consideration

Whether, in view of the amendment to Section 136(1) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 effective 10.01.2025, the petitioners are required to approach the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (rather than invoke writ jurisdiction) to question the impugned order passed by the Deputy Commissioner under Section 136(3) of the Act.

¶36

Court's answer

The preliminary objection raised by the Government counsel was upheld: having regard to the amendment to Section 136(1) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (w.e.f. 10.01.2025), the petitioners must question the Deputy Commissioner's order under Section 136(3) before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal; accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed with liberty reserved to the petitioners to approach the Tribunal.

¶40

Ratio / Principle

As part of the operative order, the respondents were directed not to take any precipitative action for a period of four weeks to enable the petitioners to approach the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal.

¶40

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking certiorari to quash the Deputy Commissioner's (Chamarajanagar) order in R.A.67/2022-23 dated 22.05.2025 (Annexure-H), dismissed on the preliminary objection that, following the amendment to Section 136(1) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 effective 10.01.2025, the remedy against an order passed by the Deputy Commissioner under Section 136(3) lies before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. Liberty reserved to the petitioners to approach the Tribunal; respondents restrained from taking precipitative action for four weeks; Government Pleader permitted to file memo of appearance within four weeks.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:7444 WP No. 39373 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 39373 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT. Y.L. NAGARATHNA W/O LATE K.V. NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO.26/275 PWD COLONY, CHAMARAJANAGAR TOWN AND DISTRICT-571 313.

¶10

SRI. K.N. PRASANNA KUMAR S/O LATE K.V. NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO.26/275 PWD COLONY, CHAMARAJANAGAR TOWN AND DISTRICT-571 313.

¶11

K.N. MAHESHWARI

¶12

Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

D/O LATE K.V. NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO.26/275 PWD COLONY, CHAMARAJANAGAR TOWN AND DISTRICT-571 313.

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SMT. SUNITHA P.C., ADVOCATE)

¶16

AND:

¶17

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,

¶18

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:7444 WP No. 39373 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

BANGALORE-560 001, REPT. BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶21

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT, CHAMARAJNAGAR-573 101.

¶22

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KOLLEGALA SUB-DIVISION, KOLLEGALA, CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶23

THE TAHASILDAR, CHAMARAJANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT-571 313.

¶24

J. RAJU, S/O JADEMADAPPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT NO.226 KSFC LAYOUT, 6^TH CROSS, NEAR DEVEGOWDA CIRCLE, MYSORE-560 017.

¶25

SMT. GOWRAMMA W/O LATE MAHANTHADEVARU, MAJOR,

¶26

SMT. PUTTALINGAMMA W/O LATE MAHADEVAPPA, MAJOR

¶27

RESP. NO.6 & 7 ARE R/AT: JYOTHIGOWDANAPURA VILLAGE, CHANDAKAVADI HOBLI, CHAMARAJANAGARA TALUK, AND DISTRICT-571 117.

¶28

…RESPONDENTS

¶29

(BY SRI. K.P. YOGANNA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4)

¶30

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:7444 WP No. 39373 of 2025

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO: (A) CALL FOR THE RECORDS; (B) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER SUITABLE WRIT, ORDER, OR DIRECTION AS THE CASE MAY BE TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER I.E., 2^ND RESPONDENT IN R.A.67/2022-23 DATED 22.05.2025 UNDER ANNEXURE-H; AND ETC.

¶33

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶34

ORAL ORDER

¶35

Learned High Court Government Pleader takes notice for respondents No.1 to 4. Notice to other respondent is not necessary for the following reasons:

¶36

Learned High Court Government Pleader has raised a preliminary objection that having regard to the amendment brought to Section 136(1) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, w.e.f., 10.01.2025, the petitioners will have to approach the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal questioning the impugned order passed by the Deputy Commissioner under Section 136(3) of the Act.

¶37

¶38

NC: 2026:KHC:7444 WP No. 39373 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

Upholding the submissions made by the learned Additional Government Advocate, the writ petition stands dismissed while reserving liberty to the petitioners to approach the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. However, the respondents are hereby directed not to take any precipitative action for a period of four weeks to enable the petitioners to approach the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal.

¶41

Learned High Court Government Pleader is permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today.

¶42

Office to return the original documents/certified

¶43

copies, if any, to the petitioners while retaining a copy of the same for the file.

¶44

Sd/(R DEVDAS) JUDGE

¶45

HB/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1

Smt Y L Nagarathna v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Y L Nagarathna v. the 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 Manjunatha Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Sri. Chandrashekar Shetty Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Parvathamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Pramodha S Vs Deputy Commissioner

Sri. C.G. Mallaesh Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Parvathamma Vs the State of Karnataka