PADMA W/O VENKATESH KULKARNI @ DARJI,. vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 17th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2012 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.65928/2012 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: 1. Smt. Padma, W/o Venkatesh Kulkarni @ Darji, Age: about 45 years, Occ: Household work and Agriculture, R/o Near Muudu Maruti Temple, Hungund, Dist: Bagalkot. 2. Gururaj, S/o Venkatesh Kulkarni @ Darji, Age: about 31 years, Occ: Private Service and Agriculture, R/o Near Muudu Maruti Temple, Hungund, Dist: Bagalkot. (Now at Gopalpur Galli, Near Old Income Tax Office, Bijapur.) 3. Shrinivas @ Babu, S/o Venkatesh Kulkarni @ Darji, Age: about 25 years, Occ: Business and Agriculture, R/o Near Muudu Maruti Temple, Hungund, Dist: Bagalkot. 4. Anil, S/o Venkatesh Kulkarni @ Darji, Age: about 22 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o Near Muudu Maruti Temple, Hungund, Dist: Bagalkot. 5. Smt. Sweta, W/o Prabhuraj Kulkarni, Age: about 23 years, Occ: Household work, R/o Near Shanidevar Temple, Ram Mandir Road, Bijapur.

2 6. Smt. Swapna, W/o Venkatesh Katti, Age: about 20 years, Occ: Household work, R/o C/o Venkatesh Katti, Sairam Nagar, Hampi Road, Hospeth, Dist: Bellary. Petitioners (By Sri G.R.Raibagi, Adv.) AND: 1. The State of Karnataka, Represented by the Revenue Secretary, Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore. 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Navanagar, Bagalkot. 3. The Asst. Commissioner, Bagalkot Division, Navanagar, Bagalkot. 4. The Tahasildar, Hungund, Dist: Bagalkot. Respondents (By Smt. K. Vidyavati, A.G.A) This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the order/endorsement issued by the 4th respondent dated 24.01.2012 as per Annexure-F and also dated 16.05.2012 as per Annexure-J, etc. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

3 ORDER Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and examined the endorsements dated 24.01.2012, Annexure-F and 16.06.2012, Annexure-J of the Tahsildar. The short point for decision making is “Whether the Tahsildar was justified in declining to record the names of the petitioners in the pahani records against column No.9 on being informed that the petitioners had acquired right, title and interest in the agricultural lands bearing R.S.No. 114 of Marol village, Tq. Hungund, Dist: Bagalkot”? 2. There is no dispute that the claim of tenancy in respect of the agricultural land is pending before the Land Tribunal, Hungund. There is also no dispute that in column No.9 in the RTC pahani, name of the first petitioner’s husband as well as his brother are shown as kabjedar. If that is so, the said two persons having reportedly died, petitioners being their legal

4 representatives are entitled to have their names recorded in column No.9 in the RTC. The entry against column No.12 however requires the final decision of the Land Tribunal over the claim of tenancy. 3. In that view of the matter, the endorsements impugned of the Tahsildar cannot but be said to be arbitrary and illegal, calling for interference. 4. In the result, petition is allowed. Endorsements are quashed and a direction is issued to the Tahsildar to consider the petitioners’ request and pass orders in accordance with law. Compliance by 26.11.2012. SD/- JUDGE mkc