Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 37494 (KAR)

GODI TIMMAPPA S/O BASAPPA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY

WP/102105/2025 · 2025-10-28

Anant Ramanath Hegde

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14453 WP No. 102105 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 102105 OF 2025 (SCST) BETWEEN: GODI TIMMAPPA S/O BASAPPA, AGE ABOUT 67 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. DAGGI BASAPUR, KAMMTHAHALLI, DIST. VINAYANAGAR, KARNATAKA-583 125. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. MRITYUNJAYA YARAGAMBLIMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY CHIEF SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, HOSAPETE-583 201, VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT. Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14453 WP No. 102105 of 2025 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, HARPANAHALLI, AT POST: HARPANAHALLI-583 131. 5. THE TAHASILDAR, TAHASHILDAR OFFICE, HARPANAHALLI-583 131. 6. REVENUE INSPECTOR, ARASIKERI CIRCLE, ARASIKERI, HARPANAHALLI TALUKA, DIST. VIJAYANAGAR-583 125. 7. LAMBANI RAMANAIK S/O MAGANAIK, AGE. MAJOR, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. NANDIKAMB TANDA VILLAGE, HARAPANAHALLI TALUKA, DIST. VIJAYANAGAR-583 131. 8. THE POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR, ARASIKERE POLICE STATION, HARAPANAHALLI TALUK, VIJAYANAGAR DISTRICT-583 125. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R6 AND R8; SRI. M.R. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R7) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER NO. PTCL(HA.HALLI)/C.R/08/2023 DATED 02/07/2024 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4 VIDE “ANNEXURE-B” AND WHICH IS ALSO CONFIRMED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 IN SAM.KAM.APPEALU/PTCL/64/2024-25 DATED 21.11.2024 VIDE “ANNEXURE-C” IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14453 WP No. 102105 of 2025 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) Learned counsel for the petitioner is assailing the order passed by respondent No.4/Assistant Commissioner in Proceeding No.P.T.C.L.(Ha.Halli)/C.R./08/2023 dated 02.07.2024 and also the order passed by respondent No.3/Deputy Commissioner in Proceeding No.Kam/Appealu/P.T.C.L./64/2024- 25 dated 21.11.2024. 2. In terms of the orders at Annexures-B and C, the land purchased by the petitioner i.e. the property bearing Sy.No.4/02A measuring 4 acres and 44 guntas in Kalagudi Village, Arasikere Hobali of Harapanahalli Taluk is ordered to be confiscated in favour of the State and directed to be registered in the name of the original grantee. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the property was granted to the grantee on 26.10.1979 and later petitioner purchased the property on 31.05.1996. The dispute is raised by the legal representatives of grantee namely respondent - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14453 WP No. 102105 of 2025 No.7 contending that the transaction dated 31.05.1996 violates the provisions of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (‘Act of 1978’). 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the dispute raised is hit by delay and laches and the issue raised in the present petition is covered in terms of judgment of the Apex Court in NEKKANTI RAMA LAKSHMI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER1. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate would oppose the petition on the premise that there is a violation of the provisions of the Act of 1978 and both authorities are justified in passing the impugned order. 6. Admittedly, the property is sold in favour of the petitioner on 31.05.1996. The dispute is raised for the first time in the year 2023. There is a delay of 24 years in raising the dispute. 1 (2020) 14 SCC 232 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14453 WP No. 102105 of 2025 7. Under these circumstances, the issue raised in the present petition is squarely covered in terms of the judgment of the Apex Court in NEKKANTI RAMA LAKSHMI supra. Hence, the following: ORDER i. Petition is allowed. ii. The impugned order dated 02.07.2024 passed by respondent No.4/Assistant Commissioner in Proceeding No.P.T.C.L.(Ha.Halli)/C.R./08/2023 and the order dated 21.11.2024 passed by respondent No.3/Deputy Commissioner in Proceeding No.Kam/Appealu/P.T.C.L./64/2024- 25 are quashed. iii. The respondent/authorities are directed to restore the name of the petitioner in the property records. iv. The compliance shall be made within 60 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE CLK_CT:BCK - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14453 WP No. 102105 of 2025 LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 34