- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:13722 WP No. 26171 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 26171 OF 2023 (LR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT P S YASHODAMMA W/O EREGOWDA AGED 64 YEARS R/AT NO 83, MADARAHALLI MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA 571422 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DINESH S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M S BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU 560001 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MANDYA SUB DIVISION MANDYA-571401. 3. THE TAHASILDAR MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571428. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA., AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R2 IN LRF.217/2015-16 DTD 31.12.2016 MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A TO THE WRIT PETITION. Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:13722 WP No. 26171 of 2023 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 petitioner has produced a copy of the order sheet maintained by the Assistant Commissioner. A perusal of said order sheet would indicate that there was no mention that notice was in fact served on the petitioner. In fact, the entire order sheet maintained basically indicates that the proceedings were being adjourned due to unavailability of the Presiding Officer and ultimately, the order was passed stating that Sections 79A and 79B of the Act were contravened which required an order of vesting to be passed. It is therefore clear that the impugned order - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:13722 WP No. 26171 of 2023 was passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice. 3. 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. 4. In the normal course, the matter would have to be remanded to the Assistant Commissioner, since 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. 5. In view of the above, the revenue authorities to restore the name of the petitioner in the revenue record. 6. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:13722 WP No. 26171 of 2023 7. 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.: 6