Sri. Bylappa v. State of Karnataka

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 36985 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: SRI. BYLAPPA S/O LATE MUNIRAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT BUDAMANAHALLI VILLAGE, HESARAGHATTA HOBLI, YALAHANKA TALUK, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU - 561 203. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHARATH S. GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. GANESHA P, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶1STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS ADDL CHIEF SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶2DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, D.C OFFICE, K.G ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009.

¶3THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU NORTH-DIVISION, KANDHAYA BHAVAN, K.G ROAD, by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka e -e2e-eeeee e e NC:(2026:KHC:7682 WP(No.(36985(of(2025 BENGALURU,-,560,009.,

4., TAHASILDAR,, BENGALURU,NORTH,TALUK,, YALAHANKA,HOBLI,, BENGALURU,-,560,009.,

5., ASSISTANT,DIRECTOR,OF,LAND,RECORDS,, BENGALURU,NORTH,TALUK,, IN,OFFICE,OF,KANDAYA,BHAVANA,, K.G,ROAD,,BENGALURU,-,560,009., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SMT.,NAVYA,SHEKHAR,,AGA), , THIS,W.P.,IS,FILED,UNDER,ARTICLES,226,AND,227,OF, THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA, PRAYING, TO, DIRECT, THE, RESPONDENT,AUTHORITIES,TO,EFFECT,PHODI,IN,RESPECT,OF, LAND, MEASURING, 1, ACRE, 05, GUNTAS, IN, SY.NO., 9, OF, BUDAMANAHALLI, VILLAGE,, HESARAGHATTA, HOBLI,, YALAHANKA, TALUK,, BENGALURU, NORTH, TALUK, BY, CONSIDERING, THE, REPRESENTATION, DTD., 20.11.2024, SUBMITTED,TO,THE,R-4,TAHSILDAR,VIDE,ANNX-C.,, , THIS, PETITION,, COMING, ON, FOR, PRELIMINARY, HEARING,,THIS,DAY,,ORDER,WAS,MADE,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, CORAM:, HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,R,DEVDAS ORAL(ORDER On, the, previous, occasion,, the, following, order, was, passed:,

"Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for all the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to serve copies of the writ petition along with annexures on the learned Additional Government Advocate. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite several representations being given to respondent No.4-Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluk and respondent No.5-Assistant Director of Land Records, Bengaluru North Taluk, for conducting phodi and durasti of the lands in question, no action is taken by them. Learned AGA on instructions submits that since the lands in question falls within the prohibited distance of the boundary of the BBMP, a decision is taken by the revenue authorities not to conduct phodi and durasti. On the face of it, such submissions cannot be accepted. So long as the grant is admittedly made in favour of the petitioner and the name of the petitioner is entered in the revenue records, the petitioner has a right to seek phodi and durasti and it is the bounded duty of respondent Nos.4 and 5 to proceed to conduct phodi and durasti. Re-list this matter for 'Preliminary Hearing' on

09.02.2026 to enable the learned AGA to secure instructions and make submission."

¶2Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that she has received instructions that it is true that the name

of the petitioner is found in the revenue records. If that be the position, it is impermissible for the respondent-Tahsildar and the Assistant Director of Land Records to reject the application filed by the petitioner for phodi and durast. However, since the total extent of land in Sy.No.9 is 32 acres 37 guntas of Budamanhalli Village, Hesaraghatta Hobli, Yalahanka Taluk, Bengaluru North Taluk, the respondents may need some more time to complete the phodi proceedings in respect of the entire survey number.

¶3Learned Additional Government Advocate submits on instructions that the land in question is within the prohibited distance from the boundary of the BBMP and therefore the same could not have been granted to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that such a contention cannot be raised by the Tahsildar and the ADLR. At this juncture, since admittedly the name of the petitioner is entered in the revenue records and what the petitioner is seeking is phodi and durast.

¶4There is substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Unless and until the grant made in favour of the petitioner was cancelled in accordance with law

and the name of the petitioner was removed from the revenue records, such a contention on the part of the respondent-Tahsildar cannot be accepted. It is too late in the day to take up such contention and to initiate proceedings for cancellation of the grant made in favor of the petitioner. This Court has held in umpteen number of cases that such an action to cancel the grant should be taken within a reasonable time and therefore, it may not be permissible at this point of time.

¶5In that view of the matter, the writ petition stands disposed of with a specific direction to respondent No.4 Tahsildar, Bangalore North Taluk and respondent No.5-Assistant Director of Land Records, Bangalore North Taluk, to proceed to complete the phodi and durast proceedings of the petitioner along with all the other lands in Survey No.9 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. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE rv, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18