- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14252 WP No. 25858 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 25858 OF 2024 (LR) BETWEEN: 1. SRI WASEEM SHARIEF S/O MAHABOOB SHARIEF AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT HOSLINE ROAD, HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573201. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GANESHA R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE- 560001. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HASSAN SUB-DIVISION, HASSAN DISTRICT- 573201 3. THE TAHSILDAR, HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT- 573201 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. CHANDINI.S., HCGP) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 28.06.2018, PASSED IN CASE NO. LRF (79(A)) AND 79(B) 557/15-16 PASSED BY THE R-2 AT ANNEXURE-C, ETC. Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14252 WP No. 25858 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. An order of vesting passed by the Assistant Commissioner for contravention of Sections 79A and 79B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 ("the Act", for short) is challenged in this petition. 2. The Assistant Commissioner proceeded to pass the impugned order on the ground that the petitioner has not produced any relevant documents despite service of notice. In essence, the impugned order passed was without hearing or without considering the claims of the purchaser. 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. 3. In the normal course, the matter would have to be remanded to the Assistant Commissioner, since - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14252 WP No. 25858 of 2024 Sections 79A and 79B of the Act were omitted by virtue of an amendment to the Land Reforms Act, no useful purpose would be served by remanding the matter to the Assistant Commissioner and hence, the impugned proceedings initiated shall stand abated. 4. In view of the above, the revenue authorities to restore the name of the petitioner in the revenue record. 5. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. 6. In view of the disposal of the petition, all pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE RK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 9