Sri. B S Rudraiah vs The State Of Karnataka
2025 Latest Caselaw 6191 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Sri. B S Rudraiah vs The State Of Karnataka on 13 June, 2025

                                                 -1-
                                                            NC: 2025:KHC:20433
                                                          WP No. 13753 of 2024


                      HC-KAR



                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                               DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

                                              BEFORE
                               THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
                             WRIT PETITION NO. 13753 OF 2024 (KLR-RES)
                      BETWEEN:

                      SRI. B.S.RUDRAIAH,
                      S/O LATE SUBBAIAH MUDIGERE,
                      AGED 52 YEARS,
                      R/AT KALLAHALLI, MAGERI,
                      SAKALESHPURA TALUK,
                      PRESENTLY R/AT
                      KADAVALLI VILLAGE AND POST,
                      BLOCK NO.70, P.B.POST,
                      MUDIGERE TALUK,
                      MUDIGERE TALUK - 577 132.
                                                                  ...PETITIONER
                      (BY SRI. PRASANNA B R., ADVOCATE)

                      AND:
Digitally signed by
SHARMA ANAND
CHAYA                 1.    THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF                    REPRESENTED BY ITS
KARNATAKA
                            PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
                            REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
                            VIKASA SOUDHA,
                            DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
                            BENGALURU - 560 001.

                      2.    THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
                            HASSAN DISTRICT,
                            HASSAN - 573 201.
                               -2-
                                         NC: 2025:KHC:20433
                                       WP No. 13753 of 2024


HC-KAR




3.   THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
     SAKALESHPURA SUB - DIVISION,
     SAKALESHPURA - 573 127.

4.   THE TAHSILDAR,
     SAKALESHPURA TALUK,
     SAKALESHPURA - 573 127.

5.   SRI. LOHITH BHARANI T.N.,
     S/O NEELAKANTAPPA T.S.,
     R/AT NO.02,
     BHEEMAJYOTHI LIC COLONY,
     BASAVESHWARA NAGARA,
     BENGALURU NORTH,
     BENGALURU - 560 079.

6.   SRI. SATISH KUMAR G,
     S/O GOPALA G,
     R/AT NO.195, 4TH MAIN,
     2ND STAGE, W.O.C.ROAD,
     MANJUNATHA NAGARA,
     RAJAJINAGARA,
     BENGALURU - 560 010.

7.   SRI. VINAY KUMAR V.R.,
     S/O VITTALANATH,
     R/AT 18/2, 3RD MAIN,
     3RD CROSS, BEHIND B.T.S. DEPOT,
     SUBBANNA GARDEN,
     VIJAYANAGARA,
     BENGALURU - 560 040.

8.   SRI. B.M.BHAGAWAN,
     S/O LATE N.H.MANJEGOWDA,
     R/AT MUDIGERE ROAD,
                                 -3-
                                              NC: 2025:KHC:20433
                                          WP No. 13753 of 2024


HC-KAR



     OPP Y.D.D.COLLEGE,
     BELUR TOWN,
     HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115.
                                                 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA FOR R1 TO R4;
    SRI.G.PAPI REDDY, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
    SRI.VARUN PAPI REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R5 TO R8)

      THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER
PASSED    BY     THE    R-2/DEPUTY     COMMISSIONER     HASSAN
DISTRICT IN CASE NO.RP 40/2022-23 DATED 29.02.2024 VIDE
ANNEXURE - L AND ETC.,

      THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING

IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS

UNDER:

CORAM:    HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH


                         ORAL ORDER

In this writ petition petitioner is assailing the

order dated 29.02.2024 vide Annexure L passed by

respondent No.2.

2. Heard Sri B.R. Prasanna, learned counsel for the

petitioner, Sri Siddarth Babu rao, learned AGA for

NC: 2025:KHC:20433

HC-KAR

respondents 1 to 4, Sri G. Papi Reddy, learned Senior

Advocate for Sri Varun Papi Reddy, learned counsel for

respondents 5 to 8.

3. It is contended by learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner by referring to order sheet produced at

Annexure K that the counsel appearing for the petitioner

herein has entered appearance before respondent No.2 on

03.02.2024 and thereafter, respondent No.2 has posted

the matter for orders without providing a fair opportunity

to the petitioner herein to file his objection to the revision

petition and therefore, he sought for interference of this

Court stating that, the impugned order passed at

Annexure-L requires to be interfered with in this writ

petition.

4. Per contra, Sri G. Papi Reddy, learned Senior

Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.5 to 8 invited the

attention of the Court to Annexure J wherein the petitioner

herein has filed O.S.No.15/2023 on the file of the Senior

NC: 2025:KHC:20433

HC-KAR

Civil Judge and JMFC at Sakaleshpur seeking relief of

declaration in respect of the subject land and in that view

of the matter, even if the petitioner herein is permitted to

file objection in Revision Petition, the end result would be

as to decide the lis between the parties in terms of

judgment and decree that may be passed by the Civil

Court in O.S.No.15/2023. He also submitted that the suit

in O.S.No.15/2023 is dismissed and therefore, there is no

need for considering the case of the petitioner at this

stage. In this regard, he refers to the judgment of

the Hon'ble Supreme Court in KARBALAI BEGUM Vs.

MOHD. SAYEED AND ANOTHER reported in (1980) 4

SCC 396 and submitted that as the suit filed by the

petitioner has already reached finality and in that view of

the matter, non observance of the natural justice by

respondent No.2 does not arise at all in this petition and

accordingly sought for dismissal of this writ petition.

NC: 2025:KHC:20433

HC-KAR

5. Sri Siddharth Baburao, learned AGA sought to

defend the impugned order at Annexure-L.

6. In the light of the submission made by the

learned counsel appearing for the parties without going

into merits of the case, I have carefully examined the

order sheet maintained by the office of respondent No.2 at

Annexure-K. Respondent No.2 has issued notice to the

respondents on 05.10.2023 and thereafter, on two

occasions there was no sitting by respondent No.2,

subsequently, on 25.01.2024, learned counsel

representing petitioner herein has filed vakalathnama and

accordingly time was granted to file objections.

Immediately thereafter, on the next date of hearing on

20.02.2024, the respondent No.2 has posted the matter

for orders.

7. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that

no fair opportunity has been extended by respondent No.2

to the petitioner to have his say in the matter.

NC: 2025:KHC:20433

HC-KAR

8. Though the learned Senior Counsel appearing for

respondent Nos.5 to 8 submitted that, suit filed by the

petitioner herein in respect of the subject land has been

dismissed, however, it is well established principle in law

that this Court, exercising the writ jurisdiction under

Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is very

limited to the deficiency in decision making process and

not the decision itself RAMESHWAR PRASAD AND OTHERS

Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER reported in (2006)

2 SCC 1.

9. In that view of the matter, having taken note of

the factual aspects that fair opportunity has not been

extended to the petitioner herein, the impugned order at

Annexure-L dated 29.02.2024 passed by respondent No.2

is hereby set aside. The matter is remitted to respondent

No.2 for fresh consideration after affording fair opportunity

of hearing to all the parties concerned and take decision in

the matter in accordance with law.