Sri N Ramakrishnaiah v. The Deputy Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 5841 OF 2026 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN:

¶1SRI. N. RAMAKRISHNAIAH S/O LATE. NANJUNDAIAH AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS. R/AT NO.2069, C BLOCK, 2ND MAIN, 21/B CROSS, SAHAKARANAGAR BANGALORE - 560 092.

¶2SRI. LAKSHMINARAYANAPPA S/O LATE. NANJUNDAIAH AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS. R/AT NO.13, SRINIVASA NILAYA, GROUND FLOOR, J V ENCLAVE BEHIND KEMPEGOWDANAGAR BANGALORE - 560 097 REP BY THEIR GPA HOLDER MR. L.N. MANJUNATHA S/O LATE NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS R/AT NO.29, OPP., TO VDB CELADAN APARTMENTS NEHRUNAGAR, YELAHANKA JAKKUR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 064 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. R SRINIVASA GOWDA, ADVOCATE) by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka e -e2e-eeeee e e NC:(2026:KHC:11099 WP(No.(5841(of(2026 AND:

1., THE,DEPUTY,COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE,RURAL,DISTRICT,,, DISTRICT,OFFICE,COMPLEX,, BEERASANDRA,VILLAGE,,, DEVANAHALLI,TALUK,-,562,110.,

2., THE,ASSISTANT,COMMISSIONER, DODDABALLAPURA,SUB-DIVISION, DODDABALLAPURA,-,561,203.,

3., THE,TAHSILDAR, DODDABALLAPURA,TALUK, DODDABALLAPURA,-,561,203., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SMT.,NAVYS,SHEKHAR,,AGA), , THIS, WP, IS, FILED, UNDER, ARTICLES, 226, AND, 227, OF, THE,CONSTITUTION,OF,INDIA,PRAYING,TO,A),ISSUE,A,WRIT, IN,THE,NATURE,OF,MANDAMUS,OR,ANY,OTHER,APPROPRIATE, WRIT,, ORDER, OR, DIRECTION, TO, THE, RESPONDENTS, TO, DECLARE,THE,PROCEEDINGS,INITIATED,UNDER,CHAPTER,XIV, (SECTION, 161, TO, 163), OF, THE, KARNATAKA, LAND, REVENUE, ACT,, 1964, AND, THEREBY, ENTRY, MADE, IN, THE, REVENUE, RECORDS,AS, PADA/SARKARI, BEELU, IS,VOID, AB-INITIO, AND, TO, RESTORE, THE, SAID, ENTRIES, IN, THE, NAME, OF, THE, PETITIONERS,WHO,ARE,THE,ORIGINAL,LEGAL,HEIRS,OF,LATE, NANJUNDAIAH,AT,NANJUNDAPPA,BY,DELETING,THE,ENTRY,OF, PADA/SARKARI,BEELU,IN,THE,REVENUE,RECORDS,IN,RESPECT, OF,THE,LAND,BEARING,SY,NO.118,MEASURING,01,ACRES,06, GUNTAS, OF, LINGANAHALLI, VILLAGE,, KASABA, HOBLI,, DODDABALLAPUR, TALUK, BY, CONSIDERING, THE, REPRESENTATION, DTD, 14/11/2019, (ANNEXURE-D), IN, THE, INTEREST,OF,JUSTICE,AND,EQUITY., , THIS, PETITION,, COMING, ON, FOR, PRELIMINARY, HEARING,,THIS,DAY,,ORDER,WAS,MADE,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:,

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for all the respondents.

¶2The grievance of the petitioner is that Sy.No.118 measuring 1 acre 6 guntas of land situated at Linganahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Doddaballapura Taluk Bangalore Rural District is shown as "SARKARI BEELLU" and the said entry has been made without notice to the owners/kathedar of the land. The petitioners gave a representation to the Assistant Commissioner, Doddaballapura Sub-Division at Annexure-D dated

14.11.2019 seeking directions to the Tahsildar to collect the arrears of land revenue and remove the forfeiture clause from the RTC. The Assistant Commissioner called for a report from Thasildar and that Annexure-E1 is the report submitted by the Thasildar clearly stating that the

petitioners are in possession of the lands in question. However, no further action has been taken.

¶3This Court, in WP.No.19639/2021 dated

05.09.2022 considered the relevant provisions contained in sub-section

(1) of Section 163, sub-section (i) of Section 87 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, and Rule 119 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966, and held that, having regard to the provisions contained in sub-section (1) of Sections 163 and 87, it is clear that the Tahsildar shall not declare any such occupancy or alienated land holding to be forfeited to the State Government, where the arrears of land revenue due does not exceed Rs.10,000.00. Similarly, this Court has held that insofar as Rule 119 is concerned, even in Sub-Rule 2, the intention of the amended provision, which came into effect on 01.04.1988 is to grant relaxation and enable the revenue authorities to accept the application for cancellation of forfeiture even in cases where the land

was sold and purchased on account of the Government dues but which were not disposed of otherwise.

¶4In the considered opinion of this Court, a plain reading of the provisions contained in Section 163 and the Rules, including Rule 119, makes it clear that in the normal circumstances where there are arrears of land revenue, it is not the intention of the government to forfeit the agricultural lands. On the other hand, the provisions are clearly directed towards the other cases where charges are created by orders passed by Courts of law and other competent authorities where the parties are in default for payment and the Courts and authorities deem it fit to direct recovery of such debts to be collected as arrears of land revenue.

¶5Consequently, in terms of the earlier order passed by this Court in W.P.No.19639/2021 dated

05.09.2022 in the case of Shivanna Vs. Deputy Commissioner and others, the writ petition stands disposed of directing the respondent No.3-Tahsildar,

Doddaballapura Taluk, to collect the arrears of land revenue, and formally pass an order of cancellation of forfeiture (Beellu). The Tahsildar shall pass necessary orders intimating the petitioner as to the arrears of land revenue and on payment of the said arrears of land revenue, the Tahsildar shall pass necessary orders for cancellation of the order of the forfeiture passed earlier. The petitioner is also permitted to file necessary application for entering the name of the petitioner and the Tahsildar shall also consider such an application and pass necessary orders in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE rv, Sl No.: 8