Karnataka High Court
WP/6678/2026 of SRI C R JAYAPPA REDDY Vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER on 16 April 2026
NC: 2026:KHC:20799 WP No. 6678 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 6678 OF 2026 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. C.R. JAYAPPA REDDY S/O. LATE RAMAIAH REDDY, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS R/AT. NO.
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS
WRIT PETITION NO. 6678 OF 2026 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI. C.R. JAYAPPA REDDY
S/O. LATE RAMAIAH REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
R/AT. NO. 1,
OPPOSITE TO 287E LAST BUS STOP,
CHOLANAYAKANAHALLI CIRCLE,
R.T. NAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 032
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SAMMITH S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BENGALURU DISTRICT,
K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009.
2.
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION,
BENGALURU DISTRICT,
K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560 009
3.
THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR,
BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION,
BENGALURU DISTRICT,
K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009.
Digitally signed
by JUANITA
THEJESWINI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
4.
THE TAHSILDAR,
BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION,
BENGALURU DISTRICT,
K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009
5.
THE VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT
BELLAHALLI VILLAGE,
YELAHANKA HOBLI,
BENGALURU NORTH TALUK- 560 064
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHAMANTH NAIK, HCGP)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR
ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS
RESTRAINING THE RESPONDENTS FROM INTERFERING WITH
THE PETITIONERS PEACEFUL POSSESSION AND ENJOYMENT
SCHEDULE PROPERTY, EXCEPT IN ACCORDANCE WITH DUE
PROCESS OF LAW AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THERE IN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
The immediate threat for the petitioner was the erection of a board on the property belonging to the petitioner stating that the land belongs to the
HC-KAR
Government. Therefore, the prayer in the writ petition is to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to remove the illegal board erected on the petition schedule property. There are three pieces of the petition schedule property. In schedule ‘A’ is property bearing Survey No.55/P, Bengaluru North Taluk, Yelahanka Hobli, Bellahalli Village measuring 2 acres; in Schedule ‘B’ is 2 acres of land in Survey No.55 of the same village and in the schedule ‘C’ is also measuring 2 acres in Survey No.55 of the same village. The composite schedule is also given in the writ petition, to an extent of 6 acres in Survey No.55 out of the total extent of 122 acres 20 guntas.
2. On 27.02.2026, this Court issued directions to the respondent - Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluk, to immediately proceed to remove the board put up on the petition schedule property and on the next date of hearing, it was submitted by the learned High Court Government Pleader that the board has been removed.
HC-KAR
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petition may be disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities, more particularly the Tahsildar that if at all any action is required to be taken against the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is occupying Government lands, then the Tahsildar may be directed to take action only in accordance with law after issuing notice to the petitioner and affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the respondent - Tahsildar cannot deny the fact that the name of the petitioner is found in the RTC and the petitioner has purchased the properties in question under registered sale deeds from the previous kathedars.
4. In the light of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of, with a direction to the respondent authorities, more particularly the 4th respondent-Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluk, that if at all any action is required to be taken against the petitioner on the ground that the
HC-KAR
petitioner has occupied Government lands in the guise of having purchased 6 acres of land under registered sale deeds, then the Tahsildar shall take action only in accordance with law after issuing notice to the petitioner and after affording sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to have his say in the matter.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE
KLY