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
NC: 2025:KHC:39746-DB
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.
NC: 2025:KHC:39746-DB
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.
NC: 2025:KHC:39746-DB
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.
NC: 2025:KHC:39746-DB
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.
NC: 2025:KHC:39746-DB
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
NC: 2025:KHC:39746-DB
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,
NC: 2025:KHC:39746-DB
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
