SMT. RENUKABAI W/O LAXMAPPA MULLUR vs THE TAHSILDAR AND TALUKA EXECUTIVE MAGISRAE RAMDURG
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16920
WP No. 101780 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020035462026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
TH
DATED THIS THE 12 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
WRIT PETITION NO. 101780 OF 2026 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. RENUKABAI W/O LAXMAPPA MULLUR
AGE 50 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
2. KRISHNA S/O LAXMAPPA MULLUR
AGE 36 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
3. RAVINDRA S/O LAXMAPPA MULLUR
AGE 35 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
4. PANDAPPA S/O HANUMAPPA MULLUR
AGE 55 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
5. GALEPPA S/O HANUMAPPA MULLUR
AGE 52 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
ALL R/O KHILLA-HOSAKOTI,
TQ. MUDHOL, DIST. BAGALKOT 587313.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. PRANAV BADAGI, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. S.B. HEBBALLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally
signed by
SAROJA
HANGARAKI
Location:
high court of
karnataka,
dharwad
bench
1. THE TAHSILDAR AND
TALUKA EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE,
RAMDURG, DIST. BELAGAVI 591123.
2. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR,
K.CHANDARAGI HOBLI,
TQ. RAMADRUG, DIST. BELAGAVI 591123.
3. SHRI SHANKAR S/O IRAPPA VAKUND
AGE. 40 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/O JAMKHANDI, NOW AT KHILLA-HOSAKOTI,
TQ. MUDHOL, DIST. BAGALKOT 587313.
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16920
WP No. 101780 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020035462026
4. SMT. ARATI W/O RAVINDRA DANAWWAGOL,
AGE. 35 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/O GOKAK, NOW AT KHILLA-HOSAKOTI,
TQ. MUDHOL, DIST. BAGALKOT 587313.
5. SHRI ARJUN W/O LAXMAPPA KAMATAR
AGE. 40 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/O DADANATTI, NOW AT KHILLA-HOSAKOTI,
TQ. MUDHOL, DIST. BAGALKOT 587313.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRASHANTH V. MOGALI, HCGP FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI. ROHIT S. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R3 AND R5 ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE
NATURE OF CERTIORARI, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT
DATED 04.01.2026 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 IN NO.LND/CR-
132/25-26 VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND ETC.
THIS WP COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS
MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
ORAL ORDER
1. Petitioners, who claim to be the owners in possession of
agricultural lands bearing Survey Nos.75/1 and 78/3
situated at Udapudi Village, K. Chandargi Hobli,
Ramadurg Taluk, Belagavi District are before this Court
being aggrieved by the communication dated 04.01.2026
issued by the Tahasildar, Ramadurg addressed to the
Revenue Officer, K. Chandargi Hobli produced at
Annexure-F as well as notice dated 20.02.2026 issued by
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16920
WP No. 101780 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020035462026
the Revenue Officer, K. Chandargi Hobli, produced at
Annexure-G.
2. By the impugned communication at Annexure-F, the
Tahasildar, Ramadurg upon the purported report
submitted by the Assistant Director of Land Records
Ramadurg, reporting alleged encroachment of road
existing on the lands in Sy.Nos.75/1, 75/2, 75/3, 78/1,
78/2, 78/3 and 78/4, has directed the Assistant Revenue
Inspector, K. Chandargi Hobli to have the alleged
encroachment removed and to submit a report in this
regard.
3. In furtherance thereof, a notice dated 20.02.2026 has
been issued by the Revenue Inspector, K. Chandargi
Hobli, calling upon the petitioners herein to appear before
him and to submit the records justifying their entitlement
over the land. It is these communications which are put
in question in this petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
communications impugned are unsustainable and the
same suffer from lack of competency of respondents in
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16920
WP No. 101780 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020035462026
initiating the proceedings thereunder. He submits that
there is a suit pending in O.S.No.26/2026 filed by the
petitioners against respondents No.3 to 5 in respect of a
claim made by respondents No.3 to 5 of existence of a
road in their land and the said suit is still pending
consideration. He submits that according to the
petitioners, no such road exists in their land.
5. That even if any such road were to exist, an enquiry in
this regard has to be conducted as contemplated under
Section 67 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 by
the Officer mentioned in the said provision. As such,
neither the Tahasildar nor the Revenue Inspector are
competent to take any action as sought to be done under
the impugned communication. Hence, seeks for allowing
the petition.
6. Learned HCGP on other hand submits that the
respondent-Authorities are not claiming any property as
contemplated under Section 67 of the Karnataka Land
Revenue Act, 1964. They have only conducted survey and
have found encroachment of a public road by the
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16920
WP No. 101780 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020035462026
petitioners. Therefore, order directing removal of the
encroachment cannot be found fault with.
7. Heard. Perused the records.
8. Section 67 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964
reads as under:
“ 67. Public Roads, etc., and all lands which
are not the property of others belong to the
Government.— (1) All public roads, streets, lanes and
paths, bridges, ditches, dikes and fences, on or beside
the same, the bed of the sea and of harbours and creeks
below high water mark and of rivers, streams, nallas,
lakes and tanks and all canals and water-courses and all
standing and flowing waters, and all lands wherever
situated which are not the property of individuals or of
aggregate of persons legally capable of holding property,
and except in so far as any rights of such persons may
be established, in or over the same, and except as may
be otherwise provided in any law for the time being in
force, are and are hereby declared to be with all rights in
or over the same or appertaining thereto, the property of
the State Government.
Explanation .—In this section, “high-water mark”
means the highest point reached by ordinary spring tides
at any season of the year.
(2) Where any property or any right in or over
any property is claimed by or on behalf of the State
Government or by any person as against the State
Government, it shall be lawful for the [Assistant
Commissioner or a survey Officer not lower in rank than
the Assistant Commissioner,] after formal inquiry to pass
an order deciding the claim.
[(3) x x x x x x Any person aggrieved by an order
made under sub-section (2) or in appeal or revision
therefrom may institute a civil suit contesting the order
within a period of one year from the date of such order
and the final decision in the civil suit shall be binding on
the parties.]”
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16920
WP No. 101780 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020035462026
9. Perusal of the aforesaid provision indicate that should
there be any claim by or on behalf of the State
Government or any property which is used as public road,
street, lane, path, bridges, etc. as contemplated under
sub-section (1) of Section 67 of the Karnataka Land
Revenue Act 1964, an Officer not below the rank of
Assistant Commissioner or the Survey Officer not lower in
rank than the Assistant Commissioner shall after holding
a formal enquiry pass order deciding the claim.
10. Communication at Annexure-F dated 04.01.2026
addressed by the Tahasildar, Ramadurg to the Revenue
Inspector, K. Chandargi Hobli indicates that there has
been certain encroachment of Government land bearing
Survey Nos.75/1, 75/2, 75/3, 78/1, 78/2, 78/3 and 78/4
by the petitioners herein who are named in the said
communication.
11. In other words, a claim has been made by the Tahasildar
alleging encroachment of the Government land, which
squarely falls under Section 67 of the Karnataka Land
Revenue Act 1964 as noted above.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16920
WP No. 101780 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020035462026
12. Should there be any claim as sought to be made, the
provision indicates that it is the Assistant Commissioner
and a Survey Officer not below the rank of Assistant
Commissioner can alone take action after conducting a
formal enquiry.
13. Admittedly, no such enquiry has been conducted.
14. The impugned communications have been issued at the
instance of a Revenue Officer who is incompetent under
the aforesaid provision.
15. Accordingly, the petition is allowed.
16. Impugned communications dated 04.01.2026 and
20.02.2026 at Annexures-F and G respectively are
quashed.
17. It is open for the Competent Officer to initiate action
strictly in accordance with the provisions of Section 67 of
the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 as noted above.
Sd/-
(M.G.S. KAMAL)
JUDGE
SH
CT:VP
LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 45