Karnataka High Court
Sri Y C Srinivas vs The State Of Karnataka on 13 January, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:1273
WP No. 25220 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.25220 OF 2024 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI Y C SRINIVAS
S/O LATE CHIKKABACHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
R/AT YENAGUNTE VILLAGE
SULIBELE HOBLI
HOSAKOTE TALUK
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562114
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.SHIVASHANKAR K, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
Digitally signed by
AL BHAGYA REP BY ITS SECRETARY
Location: HIGH M S BUILDING
COURT OF
KARNATKA DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU-560001
2. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS
HOSKOTE TALUK
HOSKOTE
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562114
3. THE THASILDAR
HOSKOTE TALUK
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:1273
WP No. 25220 of 2024
HOSKOTE
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562114
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.MANJUNATHA K, HCGP)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R3
TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DTD 05.08.2024 GIVEN BY
THE PETITIONER VIDE AT ANNX-G TO CONDUCT THE PHODI AND
DURASTHI IN RESPECT OF THE SAID PROPERTY AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
ORAL ORDER
This captioned writ petition is filed seeking direction
against respondent No.3 - Tahasildar to consider the
petitioner's representation dated 05.08.2024 submitted as
per Annexure-G to conduct phodi and durasti in respect of
the petition land.
2. Learned HCGP, on instructions, submits that one
Shivananda has lodged a complaint with the Karnataka
Lokayukta questioning the genuineness of the petitioner's
grant and enquiry is pending in regard to the genuineness
NC: 2025:KHC:1273
of the Grant Order. The complaint is lodged against the
Tahasildar questioning the genuineness of the grant order
before the Karnataka Lokayukta and therefore, the learned
HCGP has tried to persuade this Court to dismiss the writ
petition on the ground that an enquiry is pending in regard
to genuineness of the grant order, no further indulgence is
warranted in the case on hand and therefore, no
mandamus can be issued.
3. This submission is effectively countered by the
learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. He would
place reliance on the judgment rendered by the
Co-ordinate Bench in W.P.No.22247/2023 dated
16.07.2024. Citing this judgment, he would contend that
the genuineness of the grant obtained by the petitioner is
given quietus in the judgment cited supra. Therefore, he
would contend that the respondents cannot defer or object
the prayer sought in the writ petition vide Annexure-G.
4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
and learned HCGP appearing for the respondents.
NC: 2025:KHC:1273
5. The case on hand clearly depicts a very sorry
state of affair. The Revenue Authorities, somehow, are not
obeying the orders passed by the Constitutional Courts.
The case on hand is a classic case, where respondent No.3
- Tahasildar has audacity in not passing orders on the
representations submitted by the petitioner vide
Annexure-G, wherein the request is made to conduct phodi
and durasti by taking cognizance of the grant order.
6. Learned HCGP has made a feeble attempt in
persuading this Court to dismiss the writ petition on the
ground that the enquiry is pending before the Karnataka
Lokayukta also cannot be acceded to.
7. This Court deems it fit to cull out para No.7 of
W.P.No.22247/2023, which would give a quietus to the
objections raised by the Revenue Authorities in declining
to conduct phodi and durasti. The para No.7 is extracted,
which reads as under;
NC: 2025:KHC:1273
"7. Having taken note of the submission made
by the learned counsel appearing for the parties,
and no careful examination of the writ papers would
indicate that, respondent No.2, by letter dated
05.05.2015 (Annexure-D) by considering the
proceedings under Section 136(2) of the Act, has
arrived at a conclusion regarding the genuineness of
the grant made in favour of the petitioner.
However, respondent No.3 has been directed to look
into the original records in the office of the
respondent No.3. In furtherance of the same,
respondent No.3 by letter dated 02.03.2017
(Annexure-F) has arrived at a conclusion that the
land in question has been validly granted in favour
of the petitioner and accordingly, ordered for change
of entry in the computerized pahani records
(Annexure-F)."
8. Upon a closer examination of the observations
made by this Court in the extracted paragraph from
W.P.No.22247/2023, it becomes evident that the
genuineness of the grant in favor of the petitioner has
already been adjudicated by the Co-ordinate Bench. The
objections raised by the Revenue Authorities, questioning
the genuineness of the grant and declining to conduct
NC: 2025:KHC:1273
phodi and durasti, have been addressed and resolved in
the earlier proceedings. Notably, the notice dated
06.10.2024, which sought to initiate an enquiry into the
genuineness of the grant, was set aside by the Co-ordinate
Bench. This fact is further corroborated by the operative
portion of the judgment in W.P.No.22247/2023, which
unequivocally affirms the validity of the grant.
9. Thus, the Revenue Authorities are precluded from
revisiting the matter, as the Co-ordinate Bench has
provided a conclusive determination regarding the
genuineness of the grant.
10. It is imperative to emphasize that the
genuineness of the grant cannot be subjected to perpetual
scrutiny by the Revenue Authorities. The principles of
judicial discipline and finality dictate that such issues must
be resolved conclusively in a single proceeding. In this
case, Annexure-D1, dated 02.03.2017, issued by the
jurisdictional Tahasildar, clearly establishes the
genuineness of the grant made in favor of the petitioner.
NC: 2025:KHC:1273
The Tahasildar, after a thorough review of the relevant
records, recommended and confirmed the validity of the
grant. This conclusion was subsequently endorsed by the
Co-ordinate Bench, which relied on the findings of the
Tahasildar to uphold the genuineness of the grant. The
subsequent filing of a fresh complaint by one Shivananda
against the present Tahasildar does not alter or diminish
the legal effect of the earlier findings. While the learned
HCGP has raised a technical objection regarding the date
mentioned in the grant order, specifically, that the 31st day
is not present in September 1978, such an objection is
insufficient to undermine the substantive conclusion that
the land was validly granted to the petitioner.
11. In view of the above, the order passed by the
Co-ordinate Bench, as evidenced by Annexure-E,
conclusively establishes the genuineness of the grant. The
State, if aggrieved by the findings in W.P.No.22247/2023,
ought to have challenged the order before the appropriate
forum. Having failed to do so, the findings of the
NC: 2025:KHC:1273
Co-ordinate Bench have attained finality, conferring upon
the petitioner an undeniable legal right to seek
enforcement of the grant. Consequently, it is incumbent
upon the respondents, including Respondent Nos.1 to 3, to
proceed with the conduct of phodi and durasti in
accordance with the law. Any further delay or refusal to
act on the part of the Revenue Authorities would amount
to a denial of the petitioner's rightful claims, as upheld by
this Court. Therefore, this Court finds it appropriate to
issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to
undertake the necessary measures for phodi and durasti
without any further delay, as the validity of the grant has
been conclusively determined.
12. In view of the above, this Court proceeds to pass
the following;
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed.
(ii) Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are
hereby directed to consider the
NC: 2025:KHC:1273
representation dated 05.08.2024 vide
Annexure-G by taking cognizance of the
findings recorded by the Co-ordinate
Bench at para No.7 of the writ petition
No.22247/2023.
(iii) This exercise shall be
accomplished within a period of three
months from the date of receipt of order
copy.
SD/-
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM)
JUDGE
NBM
