H.S. PUPE GOWDA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the petitioners is that their grandfather was the owner of 17 acres 17 guntas of land in Survey No.18 and 13 acres 11 guntas of land in Survey No.20 of Hakkihalli village, Belur Taluk. It is submitted that they gave representation to the Tahsildar to mutate their names in respect of the property in the revenue records. As the same has not been done, the present writ petition is filed.

(2.) The learned HCGP appearing for the respondents, upon instructions, submits that the revenue documents reflect the name of Government as the owner of the property. If the petitioners are aggrieved, they have an alternative efficacious remedy under Sec. 136 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 ('the Act' for short). The learned counsel for the petitioners is unable to counter the submission of the learned HCGP.

(3.) For the aforementioned reasons, the writ petition is hereby dismissed reserving liberty to the petitioners to approach the appropriate authority under Sec. 136 of the Act in the manner known to law.