NIRMALA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the petitioner is that revenue entries pertaining to 1 acre 1 gunta of land in Survey No.189/16 and 1 acre of land in Survey No.189/18 in Yelwala village, Mysuru has been changed illegally in favour of other persons. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner claiming to be a legal heir of one Kulla Chaluvana Chaluva has made a representation to respondent no.5/Tahsildar to correct the mistake. As the same is not considered, the writ petition is filed.

(2.) The learned HCGP appearing for the respondents, upon instructions, submits that the petitioner is required to challenge the orders passed pursuant to which the mutation entries have been changed in respect of the properties. He further submits that the petitioner has not impleaded the persons in whose names the present mutation stands. He also submits that the representation does not disclose who are the legal heirs of the deceased Kulla Chaluvana Chaluva, and hence, it is prayed that the writ petition be dismissed.

(3.) If an order is passed regarding change of mutation entry and subsequently if the same is changed, the aggrieved person is required to challenge the same in the manner known to law and a request cannot be made by way of a vague representation to respondent no.5/Tahsildar. Further, persons in whose names the present mutation stands are not made party to the proceedings.