- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44453 WP No. 30863 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 30863 OF 2025 (LR) BETWEEN: THE JYOTHI SEVA SOCIETY OF BANGALORE (SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOCIETES REGISTRATION ACT) JYOTHI SADAN, BOX NO.3417, 3RD BOCK, 8TH MAIN, KORAMANGALA P.O., BANGALORE - 560 034, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SABASTIN GERGE. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANANDEESWAR D.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MYSORE DISTRICT, MYSORE - 570 001. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, MYSORE TALUK, MYSORE - 570 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. SESHU, HCGP) Digitally signed by VIDYA G R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44453 WP No. 30863 of 2025 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 19/8/2025 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN CASE NO LRF.01/2025, AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER The petitioner has sought for issuance of writ of certiorari to set aside the impugned order at Annexure-A. Annexure-A is the proceedings of the Deputy Commissioner, whereby the Deputy Commissioner has ordered that the katha of the land would continue in the name of the 'Government' and has directed the Tahsildar to take appropriate action. It is such order of the Deputy Commissioner that has been called in question by the petitioner. 2. The petitioner is a 'Trust' and submit that they had obtained permission for purchase of agricultural land - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44453 WP No. 30863 of 2025 and to utilise it for educational purposes after obtaining permission from the Government. It is further submitted that the work was not completed within 2 years and at such time, action was initiated by the respondent where the respondent authorities revoking permission granted for purchase of agricultural land and forfeiting the same to the Government. The said action came to be challenged in W.P.Nos.11922/2011 and 9644/2011, which came to be disposed of on 12.12.2011. 3. This Court had set aside the order of cancellation while noticing that under Section 109 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act (for short 'the Act'), the State Authorities could extend the time for completion of building, and to put the property to use for other than agricultural purpose. Further, the Court has noticed specifically the requirement of holding an enquiry as contemplated under Section 109(2) of the Act. Having noticed so, the writ petition was disposed of with the following order: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44453 WP No. 30863 of 2025 "(a) Both the Petitions stand allowed. (b) The impugned order in both the writ petitions stand quashed. (c) It is open for the competent authority to initiate proceedings afresh after issuing a notice. (d) Liberty is reserved accordingly. (e) It is also open for the petitioner to seek extension of time indicating the exigencies and also reason as to why they were not able to complete the project within the stipulated period." 4. It is submitted that thereafter the petitioner has made a request to the respondent authorities and acting on such representation, after making a spot inspection, the Deputy Commissioner has made appropriate recommendation to the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department at Annexure-F by way of report on 28.06.2013. 5. A perusal of the said report would reveal that construction of the building for educational purpose is completed and there are benches, desks and arrangements made for stay of the teaching staff. Further, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44453 WP No. 30863 of 2025 it is recommended by the Deputy Commissioner that as the proposed use of land is for educational purposes relating to poor children, it would be appropriate to consider extension of time for use of land for educational purposes. Though such report of the Deputy Commissioner is made on 28.06.2013, till date no action has been taken. 6. Meanwhile, it is noticed that in terms of the order at Annexure-A, noticing that the recommendation at Annexure-F has not been acted upon by the Government, the order is passed directing the entry of the Government in the revenue records and appropriate direction has been issued to the Tahsildar. 7. At the outset, it must be noticed that the petitioner's earlier petition in W.P.Nos.11922/2011 and 9644/2011 came to be disposed of, directing holding of an enquiry. The said order was passed on 12.12.2011. Subsequently, the Deputy Commissioner has made a recommendation on 28.06.2013 to the Principal Secretary, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44453 WP No. 30863 of 2025 Revenue Department recommending that an appropriate decision be taken along with the status report. 8. As has been referred to above, the reference by the Deputy Commissioner is made to the status report and has also observed that not only the building has been completed but there are other furniture and equipments for the purpose of running school and arrangements have been made for stay of the teaching staff as well. It was for the Government to have taken a decision upon the report of 28.06.2013 and till date no decision is taken. Such delay cannot have the effect of prejudicing the petitioner. 9. In the interregnum, it is noticed that by virtue of the amendment to the Karnataka Land Reforms Act and repeal of Section 79A and 79B and also changes made to Section 109 of the Act, the question of taking permission for use of agricultural land for educational purpose, no longer survives. If that were to be the legal position, the decision by the Government for extension of time, is a - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44453 WP No. 30863 of 2025 mere academic exercise and would not arise at this stage in light of change in law. 10. If that were to be so, the question of penalising the petitioner on ground of violation of Section 109 of the Act, does not arise. Accordingly, the order at Annexure-A on the premise that there was violation of Section 109 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act requires to be set aside, in light of the discussions made above. Further consequent to setting aside the order at Annexure-A, the name of Government in the revenue records to be deleted and steps to be taken by the Tahsildar to enter the name of the petitioner-Society in the revenue records. Such direction is required to be complied within a period of three months from this day. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE MCR