A. Krishna Kishor vs The Regional Commissioner And Ors
2026 Latest Caselaw 2221 Kant

Karnataka High Court

A. Krishna Kishor vs The Regional Commissioner And Ors on 12 March, 2026

Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty

Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty

                                              -1-
                                                           NC: 2026:KHC-K:2329
                                                        WP No. 201896 of 2021


                   HC-KAR




                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

                                      KALABURAGI BENCH

                            DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

                                           BEFORE
                        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
                          WRIT PETITION NO. 201896 OF 2021 (LB-RES)


                   BETWEEN:

                   A. KRISHNA KISHOR
                   S/O A. RAM MOHAN RAO (KUMAR),
                   AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                   R/O HUNSAGI VILLAGE, TQ.HUNSAGI,
                   DIST.YADGIR,
                   PRESENTLY R/AT WARD NO.5,
                   NEAR RAMA DEVARA TEMPLE, BASAPATNA,
                   TQ.GANGAWATHI, DIST.KOPPAL.

                                                                 ...PETITIONER
                   (BY SRI. MAHANTESH PATIL, ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed   AND:
by SACHIN
Location: HIGH
COURT OF           1.   THE REGIONAL COMMISSIONER,
KARNATAKA               KALABURAGI DIVISION,
                        KALABURAGI-585202.

                   2.   THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
                        YADGIRI, DIST.YADGIRI-585202.

                   3.   THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR,
                        CITY AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT PLANNING,
                        AUTHORITY, YADIGIR-585202.

                   4.   THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
                        ZILLA PANCHAYAT, YADGIRI,
                              -2-
                                      NC: 2026:KHC-K:2329
                                   WP No. 201896 of 2021


HC-KAR




     DIST.YADGIRI.-585202.

5.   THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
     HUNASAGI, TQ.HUNASAGI,
     DIST.YADGIRI-585202.

6.   SMT. NEELAMMA W/O SANGANNA VAILI,
     AGE: 40 YEARS,
     OCC:EX-PRESIDENT,
     R/O C/O SANGANNA VALLI, NEAR AGASI,
     HUNASAGI TOWN,
     TALUK: HUNASAGI, DIST.YADGIRI-585202.

7.   THE PRESIDENT,
     SAVITA SAMAJA VIVIDODDHESHA SANGHA,
     NEAR ANJANEYA TEMPLE,
     TQ.HUNASAGI, DIST.YADGIRI-585202.

8.   STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
     LINGASUGUR POLICE STATION,
     TQ.LINGASUGUR,
     DIST.RAICHUR-584101.

                                          ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI SHESHADRI JAISHANKAR M., AGA FOR R1 TO R3
 AND R8
 SRI ARUNKUMAR AMARGUNDAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R5;
 SRI JAYANANDAYYA, ADVOCATE FOR R7 & R8;
 NOTICE TO R6 IS SERVED)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, A)
ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE
ORDER DATED 13.12.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-D RECORDED IN
THE MINUES BOOK PASSED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT AND
CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.1, 2, AND 4 TO
INITIATE PROCEEDINGS TO CANCEL / SET ASIDE THE GIFT
DEED    DATED   03.01.2019  DOCUMENT    BEARING   NO.
                                  TH
1774/2018-19 EXECUTED BY THE 5        RESPONDENT IN
FAVOUR OF 7TH RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-E. B) ISSUE A
                                   -3-
                                                 NC: 2026:KHC-K:2329
                                              WP No. 201896 of 2021


 HC-KAR




WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR DIRECTION,
DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 4 TO UTILIZE THE
LAND HAS RESERVED IN THE APPROVED LAYOUT MAP AS PER
ORDER DATED 18.05.2015 AND APPROVED LAYOUT IN THE
LAYOUT FORMED IN SY. NO. 181/ HISSA 3 MEASURING 2
ACRES SITUATED AT HUNASAGI VILLAGE, DISTRICT-YADGIR,
BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION, VIDE ANNEXURE-F
AND F1. C) ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS
DIRECTING THE 8TH RESPONDENT TO REGISTER THE FIR AS
PER THE COMPLAINT DATED 30.08.2021 VIDE ANNEXURE-P
GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER.


    THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY


                          ORAL ORDER

1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the

Constitution of India, is filed seeking for the following reliefs:-

"a) Issue a Writ in the nature of certiorari, to quash the order dated 13.12.2017 vide Annexure-D recorded in the minutes book passed by the 5th respondent and consequently direct the respondent No.1, 2 and 4 to initiate proceedings to cancel/set aside the gift deed dated 03.01.2019 Document bearing No.1774/2018-19 executed by the 5th respondent in favour of 7th respondent vide Annexure-E, in the interest of justice and equity.

NC: 2026:KHC-K:2329

HC-KAR

b) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or direction, directing the respondent No.1 to 4 to utilize the land has reserved in the approved layout map as per order dated 18.05.2015 and approved layout in the layout formed in Sy. No.181 hissa 3 measuring 2 acres situated at Hunasagi Village, District Yadgir, by considering the representation, vide Annexure-F and F1, in the interest of justice.

c) Issue Writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the 8th respondent to register the FIR as per the complaint dated 30.08.2021 vide Annexure- P given by the petitioner.

d) Pass such other orders or directions as this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper under the circumstances of the case and allow this Writ Petition, in the interest of justice and equity."

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. Petitioner, who was the owner of the land bearing Sy. No.

181, measuring 2 acres situated at Hunasagi Village, Yadagiri

District, after obtaining a sanctioned layout plan from

respondent No.3 had formed a layout in the aforesaid land after

reserving sites for playground, civic amenities, park etc., in

NC: 2026:KHC-K:2329

HC-KAR

compliance of the terms and conditions of the order passed by

respondent No.3 while approving the layout plan. It appears

that petitioner had transferred the sites reserved as aforesaid

to respondent No.5 and when the matter stood thus,

respondent No.6, who was the then President of respondent

No.5 Gram Panchayat had passed a resolution in the meeting of

the Grama Panchayat to transfer the property bearing 40/96/1

totally measuring 192 sq. mtrs in favour of respondent No.7

and the decision taken in the meeting of the Grama Panchayat

was reduced in writing in the meeting proceedings of the

Grama Panchayat dated 13.12.2017 which is at Annexure-D.

Based on the same, it appears that respondent No.5 has

executed a Gift Deed in favour of respondent No.7 on

03.01.2019 vide Annexure - E in respect of the aforesaid

property.

4. It is under the aforesaid circumstances, petitioner had

filed a complaint before respondent Nos.2 and 4 and

respondent No.4 in turn had directed the Executive Officer of

the Taluk Panchayat to conduct an enquiry and submit

appropriate report. It appears that petitioner also had given a

NC: 2026:KHC-K:2329

HC-KAR

complaint to the first respondent - Regional Commissioner. On

01.02.2020 vide Annexure - K, respondent No.1 had directed

respondent No.4 to take appropriate action against concerned,

who had executed the Gift Deed as aforesaid. It appears that

subsequently on 03.04.2023, State Government has passed an

order against the then Panchayath Development Officer, who

had executed the Gift Deed in favour of respondent No.7 as

aforesaid, imposing punishment for his misconduct as provided

under Rule 214(1)(b) of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules.

Copy of the said order dated 03.04.2023 has been produced by

learned counsel for the petitioner along with a memo dated

06.08.2024 before this Court.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner placing reliance on

Rules 4 and 5 of the Karnataka Panchayath Raj (Acquisition and

Transfer of Movable and Immovable Properties by Gram

Panchayath) Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules

of 1996' for short) submits that respondent No.5 had no

authority to execute the Gift Deed as aforesaid in respect of the

property bearing Sy. No.40/96/1 totally measuring 192 sq.

mtrs. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

NC: 2026:KHC-K:2329

HC-KAR

6. Per contra, learned counsels for respondent Nos.4, 5 and

7 submits that the petitioner is not entitled for the relief sought

for in this petition and if he is aggrieved by the registered Gift

Deed, he is required to approach the competent Civil Court

seeking appropriate relief. They submit that petitioner has

surrendered the civic amenity sites to the Grama Panchayat

and therefore, he cannot have any grievance as against the

impugned resolution/decision vide Annexure - D or the

registered Gift Deed at Annexure - E. Accordingly, they pray to

dismiss the petition.

7. Undisputed facts of the case are, the land in dispute in

respect of which Gift Deed has been executed on 03.01.2019

vide Annexure - E by respondent No.5 in favour of respondent

No.7, originally belonged to the petitioner and after the layout

was formed in property bearing Sy. No.181, disputed property

bearing panchayat No.40/96/1, totally measuring 192 sq.

mtrs., was handed over to respondent No.5 Grama Panchayat

for the purpose of Civil amenity. Respondent No.5 - Panchayath

has transferred the said property to respondent No.7 under the

registered Gift Deed dated 03.01.2019 vide Annexure - E.

NC: 2026:KHC-K:2329

HC-KAR

8. From a reading of Rules 4 and 5 of the aforesaid Rules of

1996, it is apparent that without the approval of the Taluk

Panchayat or the State Government, as the case may be,

respondent No.5 could not have executed a Gift Deed as per

Annexure - E in favour of respondent No.7 in respect of the

property in question which totally measures 192 sq. mtrs.

Further, the material on record would go to show that on the

complaint of the petitioner alleging misconduct by the

respondent No.5, for the reason that he had executed Gift Deed

in favour of respondent No.7, action has been taken and the

competent authority had initiated disciplinary proceedings

against him and vide Government Order dated 03.04.2023

bearing No.UÁæC¥À 237 UÁæ¥A À PÁ 2022, then PDO of Hunasagi Gram

Panchayath, Yadgiri Taluk is held guilty of the alleged

misconduct and punishment has been imposed on him as

provided under Rule 214(1)(b) of the Karnataka Civil Services

Rules. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the

impugned decision/Resolution at Annexure-D dated 13.12.2017

to the extent it relates to transferring the property in question

in favour of respondent No.7 and the subsequent Gift Deed

NC: 2026:KHC-K:2329

HC-KAR

dated 03.01.2019 executed by respondent No.5 in favour of

respondent No.7 cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the

following:-

ORDER

(i) The writ petition is partly allowed.

(ii) The impugned resolution/decision at Annexure - D dated 13.12.2017 insofar as it relates to transferring of the property bearing No.40/96/1 situated within the jurisdiction of Hunasagi Gram Panchayat in favour of respondent No.7 and the subsequent Gift Deed dated 03.01.2019 vide Annexure - E executed by respondent No.5 in favour of respondent No.7 are hereby quashed.

(iii) Respondent Nos.1 to 4 are directed to utilise aforesaid land for the purpose for which it is reserved under the approved layout plan dated 18.05.2015.

Sd/-

(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

DN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28 CT:PK