- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45879 WP No. 33819 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 33819 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: G.S.MARUTHI S/O SUBBARAYA SHETTI, AGE ABOUT 85 YEARS, (SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED) R/O CHALLAKERE TOWN, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577522, …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R.SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER, CHALLAKERE TOWN MUNICIPALITY, CHALLAKERE - 577501. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, CHITRADURGA - 577501. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.K. KENCHEGOWDA, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 11.11.2025 NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45879 WP No. 33819 of 2025 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN NO.NIVESHANA/CR 01/2025-26 DATED 06.09.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-E TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has sought for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order bearing No.£À.ZÀ.¤ªÉñÀ£À/¹.Dgï01/25-26 dated 06.09.2025 passed by respondent No.1. He has also sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct respondent No.1 not to interfere with the ongoing development work in the land bearing old survey No.127/6 new survey No.365 measuring 05 acres 08 guntas, situated at Challakere Village, Challakere Taluk. 2. (i) The petitioner claims that the land bearing survey No.127/6, new survey No.365 was granted free of cost to one Sri.Honnuraiah in the year 1944. The grantee sold the said land to the petitioner in terms of a sale dated 10.04.1972. After such sale, the legal heirs of the grantee approached the Assistant Commissioner seeking resumption of the land under the provisions of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45879 WP No. 33819 of 2025 Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (henceforth referred to as 'the Act, 1978' for short). The Assistant Commissioner in terms of an order dated 07.11.2023, rejected the request. (ii) Thereafter, the legal heirs of the grantee filed an appeal before respondent No.2, questioning the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner. Respondent No.2 issued notice and granted an order of stay on 20.08.2025. The petitioner had got the land converted for non-agricultural residential purposes as per the order of the Deputy Commissioner dated 14.03.2025. He thereafter obtained provisional sanction of a layout for formation of sites. In view of the order granted by the Deputy Commissioner, respondent No.1 issued the impugned memorandum directing the petitioner not to undertake any development works and to maintain the status- quo. (iii) The petitioner challenged the order of stay granted by respondent No.2 in WP No.28697/2025 and this Court granted a stay vide order dated 15.09.2025. The petitioner therefore contends that there is no embargo for the petitioner - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45879 WP No. 33819 of 2025 to form the layout and the impugned memorandum issued by respondent No.1 is coming in the way. (iv) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has expended huge sums of money for formation of the layout and the impugned order is coming in the way of the petitioner undertaking development works. He therefore prays that suitable directions be issued by quashing the impugned order passed by the respondent No.1. 3. The fact that the proceedings are pending before the Deputy Commissioner is not in dispute. It may be that the petitioner obtained an order of stay of the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner. However, until the proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner are decided, the petitioner cannot overreach the process of Court by forming a layout and create third-party interests. 4. In that view of the matter, this petition deserves to be disposed off, directing respondent No.2 to consider and dispose of the appeal before him as early as possible, at any rate within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45879 WP No. 33819 of 2025 5. In view of disposal of the petition, pending I.As., if any, do not survive for consideration and the same stand disposed off. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file a memo of appearance within ten days. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE BKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34