- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4499-DB WA No. 1354 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT APPEAL NO. 1354 OF 2023 (SC-ST) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. JAYAMMA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS W/O. LATE SRI VENKATARAMANAPPA 2. SRI GOVINDARAJU AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS S/O. LATE SRI VENKATARAMANAPPA 3. SRI PUTTASWAMY AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS S/O. LATE SRI VENKATARAMANAPPA 4. SMT. UMA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS D/O. LATE SRI VENKATARAMANAPPA 5. SMT. GIRIJA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS D/O. LATE SRI VENKATARAMANAPPA 6. SRI RAGHU AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS W/O. LATE SRI VENKATARAMANAPPA APPELLANT NO.1 TO 6 ARE R/AT MANCHANABELE PUNARVASATHI COLONY SEEGEHALLI GATE KADABAGERE DHAKLE DASANAPURA HOBLI Digitally signed by AMBIKA H B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4499-DB WA No. 1354 of 2023 BANGALORE NORTH TALUK BENGALURU - 560 091 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI SAMPATH A, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT K.G.ROAD BENGALURU - 560 009 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION KANDAYA BHAVANA K.G.ROAD BENGALURU - 560 009 3. SMT. PARVATHAMMA W/O. SRI A.S. GANGARAJU AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT NO.223, 4TH A CROSS 3RD PHASE, 5TH BLOCK BANASHANKARI BENGALURU - 560 085 4. SMT. VARALAKSHMAMMA W/O. SRI M. KRISHNASWAMY AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS R/AT NO.1542, 16TH MAIN WEST OF CHORD ROAD BENGALURU - 560 040 …RESPONDENTS (SRI K.S. HARISH, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2 SRI B.R. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI M. SHIVAPRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.3 AND 4) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 13.09.2023 PASSED IN WP No. 11647/2022 (SC-ST) BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HONBLE COURT, AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION IN WP No.11647/2022 AS PRAYED FOR SO AS TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4499-DB WA No. 1354 of 2023 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA) Heard learned advocate Mr. A. Sampath for the appellants, learned Government Advocate Mr. K.S. Harish for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned advocate Mr. B.R. Sridhar for learned advocate Mr. M. Shivaprakash for respondent Nos.3 and 4. 2. This appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 13.09.2023 of learned Single Judge whereby, the writ petition of the appellants-petitioners came to be dismissed. 2.1 The challenge in the petition at the instance of the appellants-petitioners was against order dated 22.04.2022 passed by the Deputy Commissioner. It was further prayed to restore the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner which was set aside by the Deputy Commissioner. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4499-DB WA No. 1354 of 2023 3. The subject matter land bearing Survey No.166 (Old Survey No.86) at Machohalli Village, Dasanapura Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluka which was granted to one Sri Puttaiah who was the paternal grandfather of the petitioners in the year 1955 under the Depressed Clause Rules. There was a condition that grantee shall not alienate the land forever. After the death of the original grantee, the land was however transferred to one Bommaiah under Sale Deed dated 19.08.1996. 3.1 It appears that respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner initiated suo motu proceedings under Section 5 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978. The said suo motu proceedings were dropped on 12.07.2002. 3.2 Thereafter, the petitioners-heirs of the original grantee submitted application under Section 5 of the Act of 1978 seeking resumption and restoration of the land in their favour, which application was allowed by respondent No.2 as per order dated 09.09.2015 permitting resumption of the land by the petitioners. The private respondent herein-purchaser challenged the said order - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4499-DB WA No. 1354 of 2023 of the Assistant Commissioner before the Deputy Commissioner who set aside the order of the Assistant Commissioner. 4. Two aspects weighed by learned Single Judge in dismissing the writ petition and in not interfering with the order of the Deputy Commissioner. Firstly, was that suo motu proceedings which was initiated as above in the year 2001-2002 by the competent authority was dropped by order dated 12.07.2002 and the said order was never challenged and thus attained finality. 4.1 Learned Single Judge relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Daryao and others Vs. State of U.P (AIR 1961 SC 1457) to hold that it is in the interest of public at large that a finality should attach to the binding decisions pronounced by the Courts of competent jurisdiction and that the individuals should not be vexed twice in respect of same kind of litigation. Learned Single Judge also relied on the decision of this Court in Sri Narayanaswamy Vs. The District Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District in Writ Appeal No.3855 of 2019 to reiterate the principle that once proceedings were withdrawn or dismissed on merits, a fresh petition/second petition on the same cause of action would not lie. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:4499-DB WA No. 1354 of 2023 5. The reasoning adopted by learned Single Judge is reasonable and meets parameters of law. This Court is in agreement with the same. 5.1 Yet another aspect is that the application on part of the petitioners to seek restoration of land was after unreasonable delay. Therefore, the position of law discussed in judgment dated 25.11.2024 while disposing the Writ Appeal No.210 of 2023 would apply. 6. In the aforesaid view, no case is made out for interfering with judgment of learned Single Judge. 7. The appeal is meritless and it is dismissed. Sd/- (N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE AHB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 77