- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39233 WP No. 28503 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 28503 OF 2025 (LR) BETWEEN: MR. THIMMAPPA S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGE ABOUT 58 YEARS R/A CHIKKAHOSAHALLLI THAMMANAYAKANAHALL POST, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT - 562 106. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R SRINIVASA GOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE - 560 001, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BANGALORE SOUTH SUB DIVISION KANDAYA BHAVANA, K G ROAD BANGALORE - 560 009. 3. THE TAHSILDHAR ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT - 562 .106 Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39233 WP No. 28503 of 2025 4. MR. G. SUDARSHAN S/O M GOPALAPPA AGE ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT WEAVERS COLONY HOSAPETE, ANEKAL TOWN BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT - 562 106 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. SESHU, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 21.12.2018 PASSED IN CASE NO. LRF(83) AK: 34/1297- 18 BY THE R-2 AS PER ANNX-F AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER Learned High Court Government Pleader takes notice for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Notice to respondent No.4 is not necessary for the following reasons: 2. The petitioner is raising a challenge to an order passed by the Assistant Commissioner at Annexure-F invoking the provisions of Section 79 A and B of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, which is an order passed against respondent No.4, the vendor of the petitioner herein. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39233 WP No. 28503 of 2025 3. This Court in the case of Sri.Krishna Lagatagere Vs. State of Karnataka and Others in W.P.No.20096/2021 by order dated 01.09.2022 has held that the person against whom such an order is passed under Section 79 A and B of the Act is only permitted to question the said order and not the subsequent purchaser. Learned counsel however submits that in this case, the petitioner is not the subsequent purchaser. He is the vendor who sold the property in favour of respondent No.4. 4. Even if that is the case, the wisdom behind the said order is that proceedings under Section 79 A and B of the Act will be initiated calling in question the eligibility or competence of the person to purchase the property. Therefore, it is irrelevant whether the petitioner herein is the vendor of the respondent No.4 or subsequent purchaser. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed while reserving liberty to respondent No.4 to raise a challenge to the impugned order at Annexure-F in a manner known to law. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39233 WP No. 28503 of 2025 Learned High Court Government Pleader is permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE rv List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19