- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14460 WP No. 28728 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 28728 OF 2024 (LR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. BASAMMA W/O LATE BASAVEWGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT NO.D.SALUNDI VILLAGE, DHANAGANAHALLI POST, JAYAPURA HOBALI, MYSORE DISTRICT - 570008. PETITIONER (BY SRI. K P BHUVAN., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HUNUSUR SUB-DIVISION, HUSNUSUR TALUK. MYSORE DISTRICT -571105 3. THE TAHSILDAR H.D.KOTE TALUK MYSORE DISTRICT 571114 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. CHANDINI.S., HCGP) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASHING THE Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14460 WP No. 28728 of 2024 IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING LRF NO. 22/2009-10 DTD 9.08.2010 AT ANNX-F, 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 she had contravened the provisions of Section 79A and B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (for brevity, "the Act") and had purchased the agricultural land. 2. The petitioner submits that without providing sufficient opportunity and in her absence, the impugned order was passed by the Assistant Commissioner ordering vesting of land in question. 3. The petitioner, being aggrieved by said order, preferred an appeal to the Karnataka Appellate - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14460 WP No. 28728 of 2024 Tribunal (KAT) and the KAT has also dismissed the appeal. 4. 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 by the Assistant Commissioner was without hearing or without considering the claims of the purchaser. 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. 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 - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14460 WP No. 28728 of 2024 consideration of the proceedings afresh. However, since Sections 79A & B 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 petitioner in the revenue record. 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 PKS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 8