- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18491 WP No. 35441 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 35441 OF 2024 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: PARIWAR PALACE APARTMENT OWNERS ASSOCIATION (R) REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA ASSOCIATION REGISTERED ACT 1960 REP BY ITS SECRETARY SRI ANANDAPADMANABHAN AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS REGD. OFFICE AT 67/2 DEVARACHIKKANAHALLI MAIN ROAD BANGALORE - 560076. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S. DORE RAJU, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDA, BANGALORE-560001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE HUDSON CIRCLE BANGALORE-560002. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE TASK FORCE Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18491 WP No. 35441 of 2024 BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE HUDSON CIRCLE BANGALORE-560002. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BOPANNA .B, AGA FOR R1 AND R3; SRI. N.R. JAGADEESWARA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 [THROUGH V.C.]) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE IMPUGNED NOTICE NO. BMTF/ADGP/PETITION - 1141/2024 DATED 23.12.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-A ISSUED BY R-3 IN RESPECT OF THE LAND BUILDING AT SY.NO. 67/2 DEVARACHIKKANAHALLI, BEGURU HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU TO THE EXTENT OF 1 ACRE 25 GUNTAS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned writ petition is filed assailing the impugned Notice No.BMTF/ADGP/PETITION/1141/2024 dated 23.12.2024 issued by respondent No.3 as per Annexure-A. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned AGA appearing for respondent No.1 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18491 WP No. 35441 of 2024 and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3. 3. The impugned notice issued by respondent No.3, as evidenced at Annexure-A, is clearly unsustainable in law and cannot be given effect to, particularly in light of the judgment rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.33667/2024. A perusal of the impugned notice indicates that respondent No.3 has proceeded on the premise that the subject land stands forfeited to the Government by virtue of the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, purportedly in exercise of powers under Sections 79A and 79B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 4. However, a close reading of Annexure-Q, which is a copy of the judgment rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench, reveals that the very order of forfeiture dated 10.06.2015 passed by the Assistant Commissioner has been quashed and set aside. The Co-ordinate Bench, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18491 WP No. 35441 of 2024 after appreciating the legal implications arising from the repeal of Sections 79A and 79B of 'the Act', has rightly come to the conclusion that any order passed under the now repealed provisions would require reconsideration in accordance with the current legal framework. 5. Consequently, the matter has been remanded back to the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner with a direction to reconsider the issue afresh, bearing in mind that the legal foundation namely, Sections 79A and 79B under which the original forfeiture order was passed, no longer exists in the statute book. The operative portion of the said judgment is of considerable relevance and importance to the present proceedings, and therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to extract the same, which reads as follows: "ORDER i. The impugned order dated 10.06.2015 bearing No.LRF(83)Be/33/2004-05 passed by - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18491 WP No. 35441 of 2024 the third respondent (vide Annexure-A to the writ petition) is hereby set-aside. ii. The matter stands remanded back to third respondent for fresh consideration and he is hereby directed to take into consideration the repeal of Section 79A and 79B of the Act and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. iii. Petitioner is directed to appear before third respondent on (THREEE WEEKS FROM THE DATE OF ORDER) without further notice. iv. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of." 6. Upon a careful examination of the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench, as evidenced at Annexure-Q, it is evident that the order of forfeiture passed by the Assistant Commissioner under Sections 79A and 79B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') has been set aside. The Co-ordinate Bench, after considering the legal position and the effect of the repeal of Sections 79A and 79B, has - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18491 WP No. 35441 of 2024 found the order of forfeiture to be unsustainable in law and has consequently remitted the matter back to the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner for fresh consideration in accordance with law. 7. In this background, the issuance of the impugned notice issued by respondent No.3, which proceeds on the presumption that the petition property already stands forfeited by the Assistant Commissioner under the aforementioned provisions, is clearly misconceived and untenable. The very foundation on which the impugned notice rests namely, the order of forfeiture dated 10.06.2015 no longer holds the field, having been set-aside by the Co-ordinate Bench. 8. Once the forfeiture order has been quashed and the matter remanded for reconsideration, it follows that no rights or consequences can flow from such an invalidated order. Therefore, any further administrative or coercive action taken based on the assumption that the property - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18491 WP No. 35441 of 2024 stands forfeited would amount to a patent error of law and jurisdictional overreach. 9. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered view that the impugned notice, as evidenced at Annexure-A, being founded on a non-existent and legally invalid order, cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside in its entirety. Respondent No.3 is directed to await the outcome of the reconsideration proceedings before the Assistant Commissioner and not to initiate or pursue any further action in relation to the property in question until such time. 10. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following; ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned Notice No.BMTF/ ADGP/PETITITON/1141/2024 dated 23.12.2024 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18491 WP No. 35441 of 2024 vide Annexure-A issued by respondent No.3 is hereby quashed. (iii) The respondents, however, are entitled to take appropriate action subject to outcome of the enquiry pending before the Assistant Commissioner. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42