- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28675 WP NO.28273 OF 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.28273 OF 2018 (LR) BETWEEN: 1. SEETAHRAMA SHETTY S/O LATE KUTTI SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS. 2. SAMPA D. SHETTY S/O LATE KUTTI SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS. 3. RAVI SHETTY S/O LATE KUTTI SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS. 4. INDIRA SHETTY S/O LATE KUTTI SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS. 5. GANESH SHETTY S/O LATE KUTTI SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS. ALL ARE RESIDING AT: KAPPETTU, KELAMANE, AMBALAPADY POST, UDUPI - 576 101. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SAMPAT ANAND SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE SPECIAL OFFICER LAND REFORMS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28675 WP NO.28273 OF 2018 UDUPI DISTRICT, UDUPI - 576 101. 2. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 010. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.P. YOGANNA, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 28TH MARCH, 2018 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU (MANGALURU CAMP) IN APPEAL NO.1143/2014 VIDE ANNEXURE-A, WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL IN AN ILLEGAL AND ARBITRARY MANNER DISMISSED THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS UNDER SECTION 5 OF LIMITATION ACT AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISSED THE ABOVE APPEAL; QUASH THE ORDER DATED 18TH MAY, 2005 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1-SPECIAL OFFICER LAND REFORMS, UDUPI IN PROCEEDING NO.LRY:7A:43:131 TRI:301:00-01 VIDE ANNEXURE-B; CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.1 HEREIN TO CONSIDER AND DISPOSE OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE FATHER OF THE PETITIOENRS HEREIN AND NOW ENTITLED TO BE PURSUED BY THE PETITIONERS HEREIN AS LEGAL HEIRS OF THE DECEASED CLAIMANT-KUTTI SHETTY IN FURTHERANCE OF FORM NO.7A DATED 13TH JANUARY, 1999 VIDE ANNEXURE- C; AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, petitioners are assailing the order dated 28th March, 2018 (Annexure-A) passed by the Karnataka - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28675 WP NO.28273 OF 2018 Appellate Tribunal, Benglauru (Mangaluru Camp) in Appeal No.1143/2014 and order dated 18th May, 2005 (Annexure-B) passed by the respondent No.1 in proceedings No.LRY 7A 43:131 TRI:301:00-01. 2. Heard Sri. Sampath Anand Shetty, learned counsel appearing for petitioners and Sri. K.P. Yoganna, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents. 3. Sri. Sampath Anand Shetty, learned counsel appearing for petitioners invited the attention of the Court to the order dated 18th May, 2005 (Annexure-B) and submitted that the said order has been passed by the respondent No.1 in the absence of the parties. In this connection, learned counsel appearing for petitioners also invited the attention of the Court to the Notice dated 21st April, 2005 (Annexure-J) and submitted the said notice has not been issued properly to the parties for their presence at the time of the proceedings. Accordingly, he sought for interference of this Court. 4. Per contra, Sri. K.P. Yoganna, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents argued in favour of the impugned orders passed by the respondent No.1 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28675 WP NO.28273 OF 2018 and Karnataka Appellate Tribunal and submitted that the writ petition requires to be dismissed in limine. 5. In the light of submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, on careful examination of Annexure-J as well as proceedings dated 18th May, 2005 (Annexure-B) by the respondent No.1, the same would indicate that the respondent No.1 has not issued the notice to parties and secured their presence for enquiry in the matter. In that view of the matter, taking into consideration the fact that the impugned order dated 18th May, 2005 (Annexure-B) has been passed in the absence of the parties by looking into the records, I am of the view that, it is a fit case to remand the matter to the original authority i.e., the respondent No.1 to reconsider the issue afresh, after issuing notice to the parties concerned. It is also forthcoming from the impugned order dated 28th March, 2018 (Annexure-A) passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.1143/2014 that the respondent No.2 therein viz., Honnayya Hegde was expired on 12th February, 1963. Therefore, the respondent No.1 is directed to issue notice to the petitioners and take decision in the matter in - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28675 WP NO.28273 OF 2018 accordance with law, after conducting enquiry with regard to grant of land in terms of the application filed by the petitioners herein, seeking occupancy right in Form No.7A. It is made clear that, the respondent No.1 shall concluded the proceedings as expeditiously as possible. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53