IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA WRIT PETITION No.42162/2016 AND WRIT PETITION Nos. 61006-61007/2016 (*KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN:
SRI. SIDDAPPA, S/O. LATE BYLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, RESIDING AT GANIGARAHALLI VILLAGE, YESHWANTHAPUR HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI THYAGARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR SRI R PADMANABHA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, BANGALORE-560009.
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BANGALORE NORTH, BANGALORE-560009.
3. THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE-560009.
*Corrected vide chamber order dated 30.10.2017 4. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR YESHWANTHAPUR CIRCLE, OFFICE AT BAGALAGUNTE BBMP OFFICE, BAGALAGUNTE, BANGALORE-560073.
5. THE VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT, BANAVARA PANCHYAT CIRCLE, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE-560009.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. PRAMODHINI KISHAN, AGA) …… THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO MUTATE THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER IN RELEVANT REVENUE RECORDS SUCH AS MUTATION, RTC, ETC., AS OWNER AND IN POSSESSION IN RESPECT OF SY. NO.28/2 MEASURING 7 GUNTAS, IN SY NO.49/11 MEASURING 7.5 GUNTA AND SY NO.45/2 MEASURING 11 GUNTAS ALL THESE PROPERTIES ARE SITUATED AT GANIGARAHALLI VILAGE, YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, FORTHWITH BY CONSIDERING AND DISPOSE OF THE APPLICATION MADE BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-D & E.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner filed the above writ petitions for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to mutate the name of the petitioner in the relevant revenue records such as mutation, RTC etc. as owner and in possession in respect of Sy.No.28/2 measuring 7 guntas, in Sy.No. 49/11 measuring 7.5 guntas and Sy.No.45/2 measuring 11 guntas, situated at Ganigarahalli, Yeshwanthapura Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, by considering the applications made by the petitioner vide Annexures-D and E.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that he purchased the property in question under three different sale deeds dated 26.12.1977, 30.01.1979 and 12.02.1979 from its previous owners. Inspite of the same, the jurisdictional revenue authorities have not entered the name of the petitioner in revenue records such as mutation, RTC etc. Therefore, petitioner made a representation dated 10.06.2003 to the third respondent, requesting to enter the name of the petitioner in the revenue records. But respondents have neither considered nor passed any orders. Therefore, petitioner made another representation in the form a legal notice dated 11.03.2014 which was also not considered by the authorities. Hence the present writ petitions are filed.
3. Sri Thyagaraja.S, learned counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer for consideration of Annexure-D by the respondents, in accordance with law. He also submits that the petitioner will file a fresh representation by producing the registered sale deeds/ documents.
4. Smt.Pramodhini Kishan, learned Addl.
Government Advocate, fairly submits that the competent authority to consider the representation of the petitioner is the Special Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluk, Bengaluru. Therefore, petitioner has to make a fresh representation along with relevant documents to the Special Tahsildar and if such a representation is made, the Special Tahsildar will consider and pass orders in accordance with law.
5. In view of the same, the petitioner is permitted to amend the cause title to include the Special Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluk, Bengaluru, as respondent No.3.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, in view of the fair submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, it is suffice to permit the petitioner to file a detailed representation along with the relevant sale deeds/documents to the respondent No.3/Special Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluk, Bengaluru, for change of name in the mutation register, RTC and other revenue records. If such representation is made, the third respondent/Tahsildar shall consider the same and pass orders, within a period of three months from the date of representation, in accordance with law.
7. For the reasons stated above, writ petitions are allowed. Petitioner is permitted to make a fresh representation along with relevant sale deeds/ documents to the third respondent/Special Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluk, Bengaluru, and if such representation is made, the third respondent is directed to consider the representation and pass orders within a period of three months from the date of such representation, in accordance with law.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE kcm