Smt Narayanamma v. The State of Karnataka

NC:(2026:KHC:14297( WP(No.(28789(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU( TH DATED(THIS(THE(10 (DAY(OF(MARCH,(2026( BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(R(DEVDAS( (

WRIT(PETITION(NO.(28789(OF(2025((KLR-RR/SUR)( ( BETWEEN:(( (

( SMT.,NARAYANAMMA, D/O,MUNISHAMI,

AGED,ABOUT,54,YEARS,

RESIDING,AT,HARALAKUNTE,,

VILLAGE,,HURTHUR,HOBLI,,

KOLAR,TALUK,,,

KOLAR,DISTRICT,-,563,101.,

…PETITIONER, , Digitally signedtiby (BY,SRI,ROHITH,R,KUMAR,,ADV.), VANAMALA N ( Location: AND:(HIGH COURT0OF ( KARNATAKA (

1., THE,STATE,OF,KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED,BY,ITS,SECRETARY, REVENUE,DEPARTMENT, M.S.,BUILDING,,BENGALURU,-,560,001., , , NC:(2026:KHC:14297( WP(No.(28789(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( (

2., THE,DEPUTY,COMMISSIONER, KOLAR,,KOLAR,TALUK, KOLAR,DISTRICT,,-,563,101., ,

3., THE,ASSISTANT,COMMISSIONER, KOLAR,,KOLAR,TALUK, KOLAR,DISTRICT,-,563,101., ,

4., THE,TAHSILDAR, KOLAR,TALUK, KOLAR,DISTRICT,-,563,101., , …RESPONDENTS, , (BY,SMT.,B.P,RADHA,,AGA), , , THIS,W.P.,IS,FILED,UNDER,ARTICLES,226,AND,227,OF, THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA, PRAYING, TO, DIRECT, THE, R-1, TO, 4, TO, IMPLEMENT, AND, TO, SHOW, THE, NAME, OF, THE, PETITIONER, HAS, KATHA, HOLDER, OF, THE, PROPERTY, IN, COLUMN, NO.9, AND, 11, AS, PER, REPRESENTATION, DATED,

05.04.2024, ANNX-K, AND, ALSO, IN, ALL, OTHER, REVENUE, RECORDS,WITH,IN,A,PRESCRIBED,PERIOD., , , , THIS, PETITION,, COMING, ON, FOR, PRELIMINARY, HEARING,,THIS,DAY,,ORDER,WAS,MADE,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, , , , ,

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

ORAL ORDER

This is yet another case where respondent No. 4 - Tahsildar, Kolar Taluk is guilty of calling for the original records from the petitioner, who is seeking to enter her name in the RTC pursuant to the death of the petitioner's mother, who was the Kathedar. On an earlier occasion, this Court in W.P.38517/2025 disposed of on 05.02.2026, has found that the Tahsildar called upon the petitioner therein to get the original records in the matter of mutation on the ground of succession. The Tahsildar was summoned before this Court and he took the lame excuse of the Government Order bearing No.ComE156/SSM/2024, Bengaluru, dated 25.11.2024. This Court found that the Government Order pertained to cases where first time phodi was required to be conducted and therefore, this Court held that under such circumstances where the mutation is sought on the basis of succession, the said Government Order would not apply.

¶2Today, the learned Additional Government Advocate submits on instructions from respondent No.4 - Tahsildar that he has issued an Endorsement dated 06.03.2026, a copy of the same is now served on the learned counsel for petitioner. This Court finds that similar directions are issued by the Tahsildar in the Endorsement dated 06.03.2026 calling upon the petitioner to furnish the original records for verification. Such an act on the part of the Tahsildar is highly deprecable.

¶3The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a specific direction to respondent No.4 - Tahsildar to proceed to enter the name of the legal representatives of Late Smt. Lakshmamma after due verification regarding the legal heirs of the deceased kathedar as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate within a period of six [6] weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. A copy of this order shall also be forwarded to the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, to take appropriate action against respondent No.4 - Tahsildar, Kolar Taluk in the light of the observations made herein above. A report of the action taken against respondent No.4 - Tahsildar shall also be placed before this Court within a period

of two [2] months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE

RB