Karnataka High Court
The Deputy Commissioner vs Sri Raju on 9 October, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:39746-DB
W.A. No.1327/2022
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
WRIT APPEAL NO.1327/2022 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
MYSURU DISTRICT
MYSURU.
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
Digitally signed MYSURU SUB-DIVISION
by RUPA V MYSURU DISTRICT.
Location: High
Court of 3. THE TAHASILDAR
karnataka T. NARASIPURA TALUK
MYSURU DISTRICT.
4. THE REGIONAL FIRE EXTENSION OFFICER
MYSURU RANGE
KARNATAKA FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICE
SARASWATHIPURAM, MYSURU-09.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SMT. PRAMODHINI KISHAN, AGA)
AND:
SRI. RAJU
S/O R. RACHAIAH
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
AGRICULTURIST
D.NO.402, K.R.ROAD
T.NARASIPURA TALUK
MYSURU DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. ASHOK PATIL, ADV., FOR R1)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:39746-DB
W.A. No.1327/2022
HC-KAR
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH
COURT ACT 1961, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS. ALLOW THIS
WRIT APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 12.07.2017
PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT
IN WRIT PETITION NO.55066/2015 (KLR-RES) IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) This intra Court appeal is filed by the appellants under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 challenging the order dated 12.07.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.55066/2015.
2. The brief facts leading to filing of the appeal are that the father of the respondent-Sri.R.Rachaiah was in unauthorized occupation of land measuring 1 acre 14 guntas of land in Sy.No.34 of Chowhalli Village, T.Narasipura Taluk. The jurisdictional Tahsildar regularized the occupation on 01.09.1977. The father of the respondent paid the TT fine. Thereafter, saguvali chit was issued and the revenue records were mutated in his name. One Sri.Madaiah assailed the grant -3- NC: 2025:KHC:39746-DB W.A. No.1327/2022 HC-KAR of land in favour of Rachaiah before the Assistant Commissioner, Mysuru. The said appeal came to be dismissed on verification of the records produced by the Tahsildar. Being aggrieved, the order of the Assistant Commissioner was assailed before the Deputy Commissioner, Mysuru and the said appeal was also dismissed on 21.03.1985.
3. The Assistant Commissioner, based on the report of the Tahsildar initiated proceedings and ordered to delete the name of Sri.Rachaiah from the revenue records and later, the Deputy Commissioner, Mysuru, granted the said land to the appellant No.4 vide official memorandum dated 05.10.2010 which was assailed by the respondent before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as 'the KAT'). The KAT vide order dated 23.07.2013 allowed the appeal filed by the father of the respondent by setting aside the order dated 05.10.2010 of the appellant No.1 herein. Being aggrieved, the appellants filed writ petition which came to be dismissed. Challenging the order of the learned Single Judge dated 12.07.2017, the present intra Court appeal is filed. -4-
NC: 2025:KHC:39746-DB W.A. No.1327/2022 HC-KAR
4. Smt.Pramodhini Kishan, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the appellants submits that the learned Single Judge as well as the KAT have failed to take note of the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner dated 18.08.2010 and without setting aside the said order, the KAT proceeded to set aside the order dated 05.10.2010 of the Deputy Commissioner, Mysuru. It is submitted that the order of the Assistant Commissioner clearly indicates that the entry in the revenue records in favour of the respondent is without any basis and the grantee has failed to produce the grant order and saguvali chit. It is further submitted that the father of the respondent has not produced any records before the Authority to prove the grant and in the absence of such document, the Authorities are fully justified in deleting the name of the father of the respondent in the revenue records and recording the land as 'sarkari katte' in the revenue records. It is also submitted that the Deputy Commissioner has reserved the land for the appellant No.4 and the appellant No.4 being a public authority requires the said land for construction of fire station and quarters. Hence, she seeks to allow the appeal. -5-
NC: 2025:KHC:39746-DB W.A. No.1327/2022 HC-KAR
5. Per contra, Sri.Ashok B.Patil, learned counsel appearing for the respondent supports the order of the learned Single Judge as well as the KAT and submits that the present appeal is filed belatedly and there is no cause shown to condone the enormous delay of 1,239 days. It is submitted that the father of the respondent was granted land on 01.09.1977 and the initiation of proceedings by the Assistant Commissioner was in the year 2010 that too without notice to the grantee. It is further submitted that the initiation of the proceedings by the Assistant Commissioner for removing the name of the grantee is beyond reasonable time and on this ground alone, the writ appeal is liable to be rejected. He further adds that still so far the grant made in favour of the father of the respondent is unchallenged. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal.
6. We have heard the arguments of the learned Additional Government Advocate for the appellant, the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and meticulously perused the material available on record. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions advanced on both sides. -6-
NC: 2025:KHC:39746-DB W.A. No.1327/2022 HC-KAR
7. The material available on record indicates that one Sri.R.Rachaiah, father of the respondent was in unauthorized occupation of land measuring 1 acre 14 guntas of land in Sy.No.34 of Chowhalli Village, T.Narasipura Taluk. Based on the application for regularization, the jurisdictional Tahsildar regularized the occupation on 01.09.1977. The said Rachaiah paid the TT fine and thereafter, saguvali chit was issued. The revenue records were mutated in the name of Sri.Rachaiah as per M.R.No.34/1979-80. It is not in dispute that from the said date the name of Sri. Rachaiah is continued in the records till 2010. The records further indicate that one Sri.Madaiah assailed the grant of land in favour of Rachaiah before the Assistant Commissioner, Mysuru. The said appeal came to be dismissed vide order dated 29.10.1983 on verification of the records produced by the Tahsildar. Being aggrieved, Sri.Madaiah filed an appeal in R.A.No.19/1983-84 before the Deputy Commissioner, Mysuru, which came to be dismissed vide order dated 21.03.1985. It is not in dispute that the order of regularization of unauthorized occupation of Sri.Rachaiah has attained finality.
-7-
NC: 2025:KHC:39746-DB W.A. No.1327/2022 HC-KAR
8. The appellant No.2-Assistant Commissioner, based on the report of the Tahsildar initiated proceedings and ordered to delete the name of Sri.Rachaiah from the revenue records and later, the Deputy Commissioner, Mysuru, granted the said land to the appellant No.4 vide official memorandum dated 05.10.2010 which was assailed by the respondent before the KAT. The KAT vide order dated 23.07.2013 allowed the appeal filed by the respondent by setting aside the order dated 05.10.2010 passed by the appellant No.1 herein. It is to be noticed that the KAT has recorded a finding that Sri.Rachaiah died on 12.07.2010 and the impugned order is passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Mysuru, on 05.10.2010 which is against a dead person. The contention of the learned Additional Government Advocate that the grantee has failed to produce the grant orders and hence, the Assistant Commissioner proceeded to pass the order dated 18.08.2010 deleting the name of the grantee by entering as 'sarkari katte' is required to be rejected solely on the ground that the grant is made in favour of the father of the respondent on 01.09.1977 and based on such order, the name of said Rachaiah was entered as -8- NC: 2025:KHC:39746-DB W.A. No.1327/2022 HC-KAR per M.R.No.34/1979-80 and till passing of the order, the name of the father of the respondent is undisputedly found in the revenue records. In our considered view, the very initiation of the proceedings by the Assistant Commissioner based on the Tahsildar's report in the year 2010 to delete the name entered in the year 1979-80 is beyond reasonable period and that too without cancelling/challenging the grant/regularization made in favour of the father of respondent vide order dated 01.09.1977.
9. The KAT and the learned Single Judge have considered all the aspects and recorded a clear finding that the order dated 01.09.1977 regularising the occupation of the land in question in favour of the father of the respondent has attained finality and initiation of the proceedings by the Assistant Commissioner and consequential grant of land by the Deputy Commissioner in favour of appellant No.4, is illegal. We do not find any error or perversity in the findings recorded by the KAT as well as the learned Single Judge calling for interference in this appeal. We are also of the view that there is no sufficient cause shown in the affidavit filed accompanying the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, -9- NC: 2025:KHC:39746-DB W.A. No.1327/2022 HC-KAR 1963, seeking for condonation of delay of 1,239 days and on this ground also application for condonation is liable to be rejected.
10. For the aforementioned reasons, we proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The appeal is devoid of merits and the same is accordingly dismissed on merits as well as on delay.
Sd/-
(ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/-
(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10