[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Siddappa S/O. Hanamappa Medli vs The Government Of Karnataka on 11 March, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:3859
WP No. 105137 of 2018
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M
WRIT PETITION NO. 105137 OF 2018 (KLR-LG)
BETWEEN:
1. SIDDAPPA S/O. HANAMAPPA MEDLI,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MALLAPUR P.J,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
2. SMT. RATNAVVA W/O. BHIMAPPA DALAWAI,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MALLAPUR P.J,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
3. SMT. PARVATI @ PARVATEVVA
W/O. HANAMANT MADENNAVAR,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O. JEERGAL, TQ:MUDHOL,
DIST:BAGALKOTE.
Digitally signed
by
4. BHIMAPPA S/O. LAXMAPPA GASTI,
PREMCHANDRA
MR AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF OCC:AGRICULTURE,
KARNATAKA
R/O.MANTUR, TQ:MUDHOL,
DIST:BAGALKOTE.
5. ARJUN S/O. VITHAL KOUJALAGI,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MALLAPUR P.J,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
6. VASANT S/O. VENKAPPA DADANATTI.
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MAHALINGAPUR,
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:3859
WP No. 105137 of 2018
HC-KAR
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
7. SMT. SUNANDA
W/O. SADASHIV NANDESHWAR,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MALLAPUR P.J,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
8. SHRIKANT S/O. VENKAPPA KULAGOD,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MALLAPUR P.J,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
9. SMT. BORAVVA
W/O. GANGAPPA MALYAGOL,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O. BELAGALI,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
10. SMT. YALLAVVA
W/O. BASAPPA KURABETTA,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O. BELAGALI,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
11. SMT. LAXMI W/O. ARJUN TUKKANNAVAR,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O:NINGAPUR,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
12. SHIVAKKA W/O. HANAMANT TALAVAR
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O:BELAGALI,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
13. SMT. BALAVVA
W/O. HANAMANT HORAGINAMANI
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:3859
WP No. 105137 of 2018
HC-KAR
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O.BELAGALI,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
14. SMT. SHIVAMMA
W/O. SHRIKANTAYYA HIREMATH
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O:BILLAKERUR,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
15. SMT. GANGAVVA W/O. SHIDDAPPA SHINDHE,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O:AKKIMARADI,
TQ:MUDHOL,
DIST:BAGALKOTE.
16. PAVADAYYA S/O. MALLAYYA MATHAPATI,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O:NANDAGAON,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
17. SMT. SHARADA W/O. SHIDDAPPA BHAJANTRI
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O:MAHALINGAPUR,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
18. MAHALINGAPPA S/O. KALLAPPA JITTI,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O:MAHALINGAPUR,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
19. TIPPANNA S/O. MAHADEVA BHAJANTRI
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O:AKKIMARADI,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
20. SIDDAPPA S/O. MAHADEV BHAJANTRI,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:3859
WP No. 105137 of 2018
HC-KAR
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O:MALLAPUR P.J,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
21. SHANKAR S/O. MAHALINGAPPA KARIGAR,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O:BUDNI P.D,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
22. KALLAPPA S/O. MAHALINGAPPA KARIGAR
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O:BUDNI P.D,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
23. SMT. SUSHILA W/O. PARAYYA MATHAPATI
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O BELAGALI,
TQ:MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SHRIHARSH.A.NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BAGALKOTE DISTRICT,
BAGALKOTE.
3. THE TAHASILDAR
MUDHOL TALUKA,
MUDHOL, DIST:BAGALKOTE.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.MALA.B.BHUTE, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.
-5-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:3859
WP No. 105137 of 2018
HC-KAR
THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN
'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
Sri.Shriharsha A.Neelopant., counsel for the petitioners and
Smt.Mala B.Bhute., AGA for respondents-State have appeared in
person.
2. The petitioners contend that they are the permanent
residents of Mudhol Taluk in Bagalkot District and they are
landless agricultural labourers who are entitled to be considered
for the grant of excess land standing in the name of Government
on priority as per Rule 6 of Karnataka Land Grant Rules, 1969.
Such being the case, they applied to the third respondent-
Tahsildar for grant of vacant land standing in the name of the
Government for cultivation to lead their livelihood. Pursuant to
the representation, the third respondent-Tahsildar sought
clarification from the second respondent-Deputy Commissioner
as to whether vacant land belonging to the Government can be
granted to the landless agricultural labourers. Thereafter, the
third respondent-Tahsildar issued the endorsements at
Annexures-A to D. Under these circumstances, the petitioners
NC: 2026:KHC-D:3859
HC-KAR
have filed the present writ petition on several grounds as set out
in the memorandum of Writ Petition.
3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several
contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the papers with
care.
4. The respondents-authorities declined to accord the
petitioners' request solely placing reliance on Circular dated
10.04.2007 stating that the 'Gomala Land' cannot be granted to
the private persons and institutions. The circular is furnished at
Annexure-A. A perusal of the same reflects that the circular
relates to the 'Gomala Land' and it has no nexus with the
petitioners' request. Moreover, the petitioners, never submitted a
request for granted of 'Gomala Land'. Hence, in my considered
view, the Tahsildar could not have placed reliance on the circular
and rejected the petitioners' request. Under these circumstances,
the petition deserves to be allowed.
5. The Writ of Certiorari is ordered. The impugned
endorsements issued by respondent No.3 vide Annexures - A, B,
C and D are quashed. A mandamus is ordered directing
NC: 2026:KHC-D:3859
HC-KAR
respondents 2 and 3 to consider the petitioners' request for grant
of land for cultivation afresh in accordance with law.
6. Resultantly, the Writ petition is allowed.
Sd/-
(JYOTI M)
JUDGE
AM/-
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 86
