- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14831 WP No. 26438 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 26438 OF 2024 (LR) BETWEEN: 1. SRI SEBASTIAN ANTONY S/O P A ANTONY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURIST, R/O AT NO.536, 2ND FLOOR, 4TH CROSS, HMT LAYOUT, GANGANAGAR, RT NAGAR, BENGALURU -560 032 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BAPAT SAMPATH VINAYAKA RAO., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MYSURU DISTRICT, MYSURU- 570001 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HUNSUR SUB-DIVISION, HUNSUR TALUK 571105 4. THE TAHSILDAR, K.R. NAGAR TALUK, K.R. NAGAR -571602 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. CHANDINI.S., HCGP) Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14831 WP No. 26438 of 2024 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASHING ORDER DATED 29/08/2012 IN CASE NO. LRF. 199/2011-12 PASSED BY THE R3 ANN-E AND QUASH THE ORDER DATED 07/12/2018 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DISMISSING THE APPEAL NO. 638/2013 VIDE ANN-H, ETC. 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. The proceedings were initiated against the petitioner by the Assistant Commissioner on the ground that he had contravened the provisions under Sections 79A and 79B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (ACT) and had purchased the agricultural land. 2. The petitioner submits that though he had entered appearance and produced all the relevant documents sought for by the Assistant Commissioner, the impugned order was passed on 29.08.2012 by the Assistant Commissioner, ordering the land to be vested. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14831 WP No. 26438 of 2024 3. The petitioner submits that being aggrieved by the said order, he preferred an appeal to the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (KAT) and the KAT dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution on 07.12.2018 at Mysore Camp. It is contended by the petitioner that no notice was issued to him indicating the date of hearing or regarding the posting of the matter at Mysore Camp and so also, the copy of the order was not served on him. 4. The petitioner filed a miscellaneous petition for recalling the said order passed by the KAT, however, since the petition was filed belatedly, the KAT rejected the miscellaneous petition by refusing to condone the delay. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court by way of this writ petition. 5. A perusal of the order of the Assistant Commissioner would indicate that the petitioner has produced the income certificate, RTC for the year 2004-05, genealogical tree and records of rights, index of - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14831 WP No. 26438 of 2024 lands. The Assistant Commissioner has observed that the petitioner has not produced the income tax returns to ascertain the income and the documents pertaining prior to 1973-74 to establish that he belongs to agriculturist family and that there is no match between the entries in the R.R. and I.L.R., and the genealogical tree. 6. A perusal of the impugned order would indicate that whether the petitioner was directed and afforded an opportunity for production of these documents is not forthcoming. Furthermore, the appeal filed by the petitioner challenging this order has, however, been dismissed for non-prosecution by the KAT. 7. Since the issue involved is one of vesting of the land, obviously the person who would be affected by the order requires an opportunity of being heard in the matter. Consequently, the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner and the KAT would not be sustainable. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:14831 WP No. 26438 of 2024 8. In the normal course, the orders impugned would have been set aside and the matter would be remanded to the Assistant Commissioner for consideration of the proceedings afresh. 9. However, since the pendency in this Writ Petition Sections 79A and 79B of the Act were omitted and all the proceedings were ordered to be abated, no useful purpose would be served by remanding the matter and it is hereby held that the proceedings initiated against the petitioner in violation of Sections 79A and 79B of the Act shall stand abated. This Writ Petition is, accordingly, allowed. 10. 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.: 8