E-khata authorities must inspect the site and verify Panchayat records before seeking Tahsildar verification.

The petitioners relied on a Hakku Patra for Site No. 175, measuring 30 × 50 feet at Pattandur Agrahara, and revenue entries made by the erstwhile Village Panchayat.

They sought a direction to the Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) and its officers to consider their application for an e-khatha.

The GBA submitted that Tahsildar verification might be necessary because the certificate relied on was different from another Hakku Patra issued under the same scheme, raising doubt about its genuineness.

The petitioners stated that they or their predecessor had received the Hakku Patra under a scheme connected with the 25th Independence Day celebrations and that they had constructed a pucca house on the site.

The Court considered the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Whether the petitioners’ request for e-khatha could be considered on the basis of the Hakku Patra and the erstwhile Panchayat’s revenue entries, notwithstanding the GBA’s concerns about the document’s genuineness.

Whether the Assistant Revenue Officer should conduct an on-site inspection and verify the former Panchayat’s records before seeking verification from the jurisdictional Tahsildar.

The petition was brought under Article 226 of the Constitution, which empowers the High Court to issue appropriate directions.

The Court applied the principle that it should not endorse a claim where the authorities have expressed doubts, but must ensure that those doubts do not stifle accrued rights; accordingly, verification should be directed to relevant evidence, including the claimed construction and the erstwhile Panchayat’s records, before further Tahsildar verification is sought.

No specific statute, regulation, or precedent is identified as the basis of the Court’s decision.

The Court did not determine the authenticity of the Hakku Patra or direct that an e-khatha be issued.

It treated the alleged house construction and the former Panchayat’s records as material matters for the Assistant Revenue Officer to check, rather than permitting a roving inquiry into the document’s genuineness at the outset.

The officer may seek verification from the jurisdictional Tahsildar after conducting the inspection and checking those records.

This approach addressed the GBA’s stated concern while ensuring that the petitioners’ claim was assessed through a structured verification process.

The officer must consider the materials, inspect the location, verify whether construction exists and examine the erstwhile Panchayat’s registers; the officer may then seek Tahsildar verification if necessary and must take the measures required to issue an e-khatha if justified.

The verification exercise must be completed within eight weeks of receiving the certified order and the petitioners’ papers.