SMT MANGALAMMA vs THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62296
WP No. 14225 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010336762023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 11 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO.14225 OF 2023 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. MANGALAMMA
W/O LATE SRI. SWAMY
SHARADDHANANDAJI
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS.
2. SMT. ANITHAKANTHI
W/O SRI. KRISHNEGOWDA
D/O LATE SRI. SWAMY SHRADDHANANDAJI
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS.
3. SMT. PUNITHAKANTHI
W/O SRI. SHRIDHAR
D/O LATE SRI. SWAMY SHRADDHANANDAJI
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS.
ALL ARE RESIDING AT
RAMAKRISHNA THAPOVANA,
SATHNOOR VILLAGE,
KASABA HOBLI,
MANDYA TALUK AND
DISTRICT-571402.
…PETITIONERS
Digitally signed by
CHAYA S A
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. RAJESWARA P.N., ADVOCATE)
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62296
WP No. 14225 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010336762023
AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OFFICER,
MANDYA-571401.
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
SUB-DIVISION MANDYA,
MANDYA-571401.
3.
THE TAHSHILDAR
MANDYA TALUK AND
MANDYA-571401.
4. SRI. MAHESH
THE PRESIDENT
SHREE KAMBADANARASIMHASWAMY
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
SATHNOORU BETTA VILLAGE,
KASABA HOBLI,
MANDYA TALUK AND DISTRICT-571402.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHAMANTH NAIK, AGA FOR R1 TO R3;
SRI. HARIPARASAD M.B., ADVOCATE FOR R4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER DATED 26.05.2023, PASSED IN RP.NO.34/2022 BY
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, R1 AT ANNEXURE-A; AND ETC.
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62296
WP No. 14225 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010336762023
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
ORAL ORDER
1. In this writ petition, the petitioners are assailing
the order dated 26.05.2023 (Annexure-A) passed by
respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner in R.P.No.34
of 2022, the order dated 05.10.2021 (Annexure-B)
passed by respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner
and the order dated 31.12.2018 (Annexure-C) passed
by respondent No.3-Thasildar. The petitioners have,
inter alia, sought a direction to respondent No.3 to
enter their names in the revenue records in respect of
the subject land.
2. Heard Sri. Rajeswara P.N., learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners, Sri. Shamanth Naik,
learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62296
WP No. 14225 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010336762023
the respondent-State and Sri. Hariprasad M.B.,
learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4.
3. Sri. Rajeswara P.N., learned counsel appearing
for the petitioners, invited the attention of the Court
to the Official Memorandum dated 07.01.1975
(Annexure-D) and the Grant Certificate dated
11.06.1984 (Annexure-D1) and submitted that the
land in question was granted in favour of one Sri.
Swamy Shraddhanandaji, , who died leaving behind
the petitioners as his legal representatives. Therefore,
he sought for interference by this Court. Learned
counsel appearing for the petitioners further
contended, by referring to the objections filed by
respondent No.4 before the competent authorities,
that the land in question never belonged to the temple
in question and, accordingly, sought interference by
this Court.
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62296
WP No. 14225 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010336762023
4. Per contra, Sri. Hariprasad M.B., learned counsel
appearing for respondent No.4, submitted that the
land in question was granted in favour of the said Sri.
Swamy Shraddhanandaji, in his capacity as the
Manager of the temple in question and not in his
individual capacity. He further contended that the
temple in question is managed by the public and that
the subject land is situated adjacent to Sri. Kambada
Narasimha Swamy Devasthana. Accordingly, he
sought dismissal of the writ petition.
5. Sri. Shamanth Naik, learned Additional
Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-
State, sought to justify the impugned orders passed
by the respondent-authorities.
6. In the light of the arguments advanced by the
learned counsel appearing for the parties, and upon
careful consideration of the Official Memorandum
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62296
WP No. 14225 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010336762023
dated 07.01.1975 (Annexure-D) and Form No.1/Grant
Certificate dated 11.06.1984 (Annexure- D1) issued
by the competent authority in respect of the land in
question, it is forthcoming that the grantee has been
described therein as "Sri. Swamy Shraddhanandaji.,
Manager, Sri. Ramakrishna Tapovana, Sathanur
Village, Mandya Taluk".
7. In that view of the matter, it is relevant to note
that the petitioners herein have instituted O.S. No.277
of 2020 seeking the relief of permanent injunction in
respect of the subject property. However, it is open to
the petitioners to establish their rights over the
property in question in the said suit, in a manner
known to law.
8. In view of the above, without expressing any
opinion on the title to the land in question, and having
regard to the description of the grantee in Form
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62296
WP No. 14225 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010336762023
No.1/Grant Certificate produced at Annexure-D1, the
respondent-authorities are directed to enter the name
in the revenue records as "Sri. Swamy
Shraddhanandaji, Manager, Sri. Ramakrishna
Tapovana, Sathanur Village", within an outer limit of
two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy
of this order.
9. It is, however, made clear that it is open to both
the petitioners and respondent No.4 to establish their
respective rights over the property in question in a
manner known to law.
10. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed
of .
Sd/-
(E.S.INDIRESH)
JUDGE
SB
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44