Karnataka High Court
Smt.Muniyamma vs Thasildhar on 30 January, 2014
Author: Jawad Rahim
Bench: Jawad Rahim
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 30th DAY OF JANUARY 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE JAWAD RAHIM
WRIT PETITION NO.27723 OF 2013 (KLR)
BETWEEN:
SMT.MUNIYAMMA
W/O LATE NAGAPPA
AGE: 60 YEARS
R/A JAKKASANDRA VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI, MALUR TALUK
KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 130 ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI.HAREESH BHANDARY T., ADV.)
AND:
THASILDHAR
O/O THE THASILDHAR
MALUR TALUK
KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 130 ... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.D.ASWATHAPPA, AGA)
---
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227
of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of
mandamus directing the respondent to consider the
application at Ann-E and F dated 28.2.2008 and
16.1.2013 respectively and etc.
This Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in
'B' Group this day, the Court made the following:-
2
ORDER
The petitioner, claiming to be a grantee of the land measuring 4 acres 35 guntas in Sy.No.16 of Jakkasandra Village of Malur Taluk vide Annexure-A granted in pursuance to the proceedings in No.LND RUO 20/1981-82 dated 23.03.1984, seeks issue of writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondents to consider her application vide Annexures-E and F dated 28.2.2008 and 16.1.2013, respectively for updating her name in RTC from the year 2003 onwards in respect of the said land.
2. Sri.D.Aswathappa, learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for the respondent.
3. Heard both sides.
4. From the records made available it could be seen that the petitioner has relied on Annexure-A order dated 23.3.1984 to claim 4 acres 35 guntas of land in Sy.No.16 of Jakkasandra Village of Malur Taluk. Her grievance is that despite entries in the revenue records in terms of MR 3 No.7/88-89, the respondent concerned has failed to update the entries in the computer generated RTC entry which is recently developed process of entering the data. According to her, her name in the RTC continued upto 2003 and thereafter, due to computerization, relevant entry has to be updated. Despite her physical possession and cultivation of the land even after 2003, her name has not been shown in the computer generated RTC entry. Therefore, she made a representation to the Tahsildar to update the entry and issue her a copy. The respondent has not acted on the representation.
5. Sri.D.Aswathappa, learned Addl. Government Advocate submits that the respondent should be given liberty to verify the claim and then do the needful.
6. No doubt, if we take into consideration the averments in the petition, the fact is that the petitioner has made a claim to enter her name in the computer generated RTC extract based on the computer storage data, by which all the concerned data is maintained. 4 Thus there is reason why her name, should not be updated.
Accordingly, petition is disposed of. Rule issued is made absolute. The respondent is directed to consider the request of the petitioner to update the data entry and enter her name in respect of the property in question, of course after verifying her claim in accordance with law.
7. Sri.D.Aswathappa, learned AGA is permitted to file memo of appearance within three weeks.
SD/-
JUDGE RV