IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO.39578/2018(KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN SMT. K M SHOBA D/O LATE RUKMINAMMA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS GANDHINAGAR KASABA HOBLI KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT-563 101 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI D K RAVINDRANATH, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M S BUILDING, BANGALURU-560 001 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOLAR DISTRICT KOLAR-563 101 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER KOLAR SUB-DIVISION KOLAR-563 101 4. THE TAHSILDAR KOLAR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-563 101 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VENKATESH DODDERI, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DTD:22.12.2017 AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioner herein is seeking direction to the respondents to restore RTC entry in the name of the petitioner as it stood before computerization of RTC entries.
2. It is stated by the petitioner that an extent of 4 acres of land in Sy.No.156 of Pemmashetti village, Vakkaleri Hobli, Kolar Taluk and District was granted in favour of her mother in the year 1972 and Form No.1 was issued on 25.4.1975 vide Annexure-C. Thereafter, the said land was mutated in her mother’s name and same was also entered in the RTC. Subsequently, after the death of her mother, same was entered in her name.
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that when computerization of RTC took place, her name is .excluded from RTC. In this regard, learned counsel for the petitioner would bring to the notice of this Court the endorsement of Tahsildar in proceedings bearing No.RRTCR.128/2017-18, dated 22.12.2017, vide Annexure-A, wherein the Tahsildar admits that petitioner’s mother was granted 4 acres of land in Sy.No.156 of Pammashettihalli village, that the same was mutated in her name vide MR.No.1/79-80 and after the death of petitioner’s mother, the said land is mutated in the name of the petitioner vide MR.No.2/93-94. In that view of the matter, this Court is unable to understand how the same is left out in RTC. Hence, the endorsement dated 22.12.2017 vide Annexure-‘A’ is quashed so for as it pertains to rejecting the prayer of the petitioner to restore RTC entry in her name in computer generated RTC.
4. In the meanwhile, the petitioner is permitted to submit a fresh application with a copy of this order to respondent No.4 – Tahsildar. Thereafter, the Tahsildar shall take necessary steps to restore the name of the petitioner in RTC within 45 days from the date of receipt of application from the petitioner. In the event of failure on the part of Tahsildar to comply with the same, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the Contempt Court for non implementation of this order.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE nd/-