Karnataka High Court
Nanjundaswamy vs The Tahsildar on 1 April, 2026
Author: R Devdas
Bench: R Devdas
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:17681
WP No. 3074 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS
WRIT PETITION NO. 3074 OF 2026 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
NANJUNDASWAMY
S/O LATE RACHANAYAKA,
AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS,
RESIDING AT CHANDAKAVADI VILLAGE,
CHANDAKAVADI HOBLI,
CHAMARAJANAGAR TALUK.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRAVEEN KUMAR RAIKOTE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE TAHSILDAR
Digitally signed TALUK AND DISTRICT
by JUANITA
THEJESWINI CHMARAJANAGAR
Location: HIGH ...RESPONDENT
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. V. SESHU, HCGP)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO RESPONDENT TO
PUT THE PETITIONER BACK IN POSSESSION OF LAND SY NO.
51 OF AINAPUR VILLAGE OF CHANDAVADI HOBLI TALUK AND
DISTRICT CHAMARAJANAGAR TO AN EXTENT OF 3 ACRES AND
ETC.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:17681
WP No. 3074 of 2026
HC-KAR
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 High Court Government Pleader is directed to take notice for the respondent-Tahsildar.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is directed towards the impugned notice at Annexure-G dated 19.12.2025 issued by the respondent-Tahsildar. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Annexure-B is the RTC of the year 2024-2025 reflecting the name of the petitioner in respect of 3 acres of land in Sy.No.51 of Ayyanapura Village, Chandakavadi Hobli, Chamarajangara Taluk and District. Therefore, the respondent- Tahsildar cannot dispute the fact that the petitioner is the owner of the said land. However, in the impugned notice it is stated that the petitioner has encroached upon a part of the land in Sy.No.3 which is reserved for the purpose of granting it to persons who have been freed from bonded labour. Learned -3- NC: 2026:KHC:17681 WP No. 3074 of 2026 HC-KAR counsel submits that the petitioner has not encroached upon any part of the property in Sy.No.3.
3. If that is the contention of the petitioner, then the petitioner will have to give a reply to the respondent-Tahsildar. If such a reply is given by the petitioner, the respondent- Tahsildar is hereby directed to consider the reply, look into all the records that would be produced by the petitioner, if required conduct a joint survey in the presence of the petitioner and thereafter proceed only in accordance with law.
4. Till a reply is given by the petitioner and a decision is taken by the Tahsildar in accordance with law, the respondent-Tahsildar shall not precipitate the matter against the petitioner. The reply shall be given by the petitioner within one week from today.
Writ petition stands disposed of.
Sd/-
(R DEVDAS) JUDGE GPG