Karnataka High Court directs notice boards in Tahsildars' offices to display pending, disposed applications

The petitioner in the case at hand, had contended that the Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluk, did not enter their name in the revenue records pursuant to the registered sale deed.

Bengaluru: The Karnataka high court has directed the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department to ensure that the notice boards in offices of the Tahsildars in the state henceforth indicate the information about pending and disposed applications in terms of the provisions of the Sakala Act (Karnataka Sakala Services Act, 2011).

“This Court is being flooded with such writ petitions seeking a writ of mandamus directing the Tahsildars to enter the name of the purchasers in the revenue records. These are surely unnecessary litigation which are brought before this Court. If the Tahsildars do their duty in terms of the law and the directions issued by this Court, there is no need for the purchasers who have acquired title to come before this Court seeking directions to the Tahsildars,” Justice R Devdas said while further directing the Principal Secretary to file a compliance report within a period of four weeks.

The petitioner in the case at hand, Annapurneshwari Builders and Developers Private Limited, had contended that the Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluk, did not enter their name in the revenue records pursuant to the registered sale deed.

The registered sale deed was of March 15, 2023, and the entries not made even after submitting a representation on December 2, 2025.

The court pointed out that as per sections 127 and 128 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, the purchasers under registered sale deeds need not even file an application seeking mutation entry of their names in the revenue records.

A 'J' slip generated by the Sub-Registrar will be forwarded to the Tahsildar who is required to enter the name of the purchasers in the revenue records.

Perusing the provisions under the Sakala Act, the court said that the statute provides guarantee of services to citizens within the stipulated time limit and every designated officer and his subordinate is saddled with a duty to provide such services and also display the same on the notice board in their offices.

“It is also surprising that the competent officers under the Act, 2011 have not complied with the provisions of the Act inasmuch as not monitoring the applications, not providing information on the notice boards and not taking action against the Tahsildars for failure on their part to provide the services within the time stipulated in the schedule of the Act,” Justice Devdas said.

The court further noted that under the heading ‘Revenue Department', at serial number 26 (in the schedule of the Act) the designated officer (Tahsildar) must affect the change of khata (undisputed cases), within 60 working days.

“Such being the position and provision of law and this Court being flooded with such writ petitions alleging inaction on the part of the Tahsildars to change the khata, based on registered instruments and orders/judgments/ decrees of the competent Court, which would mean that these are undisputed cases, such inaction would be clearly in violation of the provisions contained in the Act, 2011,” the court said.

The court further said, “This Court also proposes to henceforth pass orders in such cases where there is gross violation of the provisions of the Act, 2011 to impose costs on the respondent-State, in terms of the provisions of the said Act, 2011.”

The court imposed Rs 500 cost upon the Tahsildar, Bengaluru North, with a direction to enter the name of the petitioners in the revenue records in six weeks.