- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14974 WP No. 10421 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 10421 OF 2025 (LR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SHANTAMMA W/O. SRI KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT. NO.23, GANAPATHI TEMPLE STREET DODDAKALLASANDRA BENGALURU - 560 062. 2. SMT. PADMA W/O. SRI NANJUNDAPPA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT. NO.24, 2ND CROSS CHUNCHANAGHATTA MAIN ROAD SHARADANAGARA BENGALURU - 560 062. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. GANAPATHY BHAT, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER RAMANAGARA RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 159. Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14974 WP No. 10421 of 2025 3. THE TAHSILDAR KANAKAPURA TALUK, KANAKAPURA RAMANGARA DISTRICT - 562 159. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 30.11.2013 IN BEARING CASE NO. LRF NO. 79(A) (B) C.R. (R) /69/2008-09, PASSED BY THE R-2 AS PER ANNEXURE-D AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. The proceedings were initiated against the petitioners by the Assistant Commissioner on the ground that they had contravened the provisions of Section 79A and 79B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (for brevity, "the Act") and had purchased the agricultural land. 2. The petitioners submit that without providing sufficient opportunity and in their absence, the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14974 WP No. 10421 of 2025 impugned order was passed by the Assistant Commissioner ordering vesting of land in question. 3. The petitioners, being aggrieved by said order, preferred an appeal to the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (KAT) and the KAT has also dismissed the appeal. 4. A perusal of the order of the Assistant Commissioner would indicate that the Assistant Commissioner has passed the impugned order without affording an opportunity of filing objections to the petitioner. This order has, however, been confirmed by the KAT. 5. Since the order of vesting would take away the rights of the ownership of land in question, the appropriate course would be to afford one more opportunity to the petitioner. Consequently, the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner and the KAT would not be sustainable. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14974 WP No. 10421 of 2025 6. In the normal course, the orders impugned would have to be set aside and the matter would have to be remanded to the Assistant Commissioner for consideration of the proceedings afresh. However, since Section 79A & 79B of the Act were omitted by virtue of an Amendment to the Act, no useful purpose would be served by remanding the matter to the Assistant Commissioner and hence, the impugned proceedings initiated shall stand abated. 7. In view of the above, the Revenue Authorities to restore the name of the petitioners in the revenue records. 8. The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed. 9. In view of disposal of the petition, pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE HNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34