- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:13060 WP No. 32190 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 32190 OF 2024 (LR) BETWEEN: 1. SRI H K SHIVARAM S/O KADABASAVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/AT K HONNALAGERE VILLAGE AND POST, KASABA HOBLI - 2, MADDURU TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT - 571433. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BASAVAIAH C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MANDYA SUB-DIVISION, MANDYA MANDYA TALUK AND DISTRICT - 571401. 2. THE TAHSILDAR MADDURU TALUK OFICE, MADDURU TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571428 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. CHANDINI.S., HCGP) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 05/01/2016 IN LRF NO. 42/2014-15 PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MANDYA SUB-DIVISION, MANDYA (ANNEXURE-G), ETC. Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:13060 WP No. 32190 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 made under Section 83 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') for alleged contravention of Sections 79A and 79B of the Act, is challenged before this Court by way of this writ petition. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner points out that the proceedings were initiated in the year 2014 and through out the proceedings, the petitioner had no notice of the proceedings and without hearing the petitioner, the impugned order has been passed. He therefore submitted that the impugned order is absolutely illegal, since the petitioner was not even heard and hence, the same is liable to be quashed. 3. The learned Additional Government Advocate points out from the impugned order that notice was indeed - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:13060 WP No. 32190 of 2024 issued to the petitioner and in spite of notice having been issued, the petitioner neither appeared nor produced supporting documents before the Assistant Commissioner. 4. A perusal of the impugned order indicates that the proceedings were held for the period from 18.11.2014 to 28.04.2015 i.e., for a period of five months and ultimately, on 05.01.2016, the order impugned herein was passed stating that Sections 79A and 79B of the Act were contravened which required an order of vesting to be passed. 5. It is pertinent to state here that the impugned order is silent as to when the notice was ordered and through which mode it was served on the petitioner. Thus, the Assistant Commissioner without ascertaining as to whether the notices were in fact served on the petitioner, conducted enquiry and the sale deed obtained by the petitioner is nullified. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:13060 WP No. 32190 of 2024 6. 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. 7. It is therefore clear that the impugned order was passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, as such, the impugned order cannot be sustained and the same is accordingly quashed. 8. In the normal circumstances, the matter would have to be remitted to the Assistant Commissioner for fresh consideration. However, in the year 2020, the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 19611 was amended and Sections 79A, 79B and 79C thereof were omitted; the said amendment also made it clear that all cases pending as on the date of promulgation of the 1 The Karnataka Land Reforms (Second Amendment) Act, 2020 [Karnataka Act No.56 of 2020] Section 12. Savings:- (1) x x x (2) All cases pending before any Court, tribunal or other authority competent under the provisions of the Principal Act on the date of promulgation of the Karnataka Land Reforms (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020 (Karnataka Ordinance 13 of 2020) pertaining to Sections 79A, 79B and 79C shall hereby stand abated. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:13060 WP No. 32190 of 2024 Amendment Act pertaining to Sections 79A, 79B and 79C would stand abated. 9. Since the matter, on remand now, would revive the proceedings, the same would stand abated by virtue of Section 12(2) of the Amendment Act2. Consequently, it is held that the impugned proceedings against the petitioner shall stand abated. 10. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. 11. 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.: 4 2 The Karnataka Land Reforms (Second Amendment) Act, 2020