- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46490 WP No. 34092 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 34092 OF 2025 (SCST) BETWEEN: 1. SRI KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE GIRIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/AT KALLIBHEEMASANDRA VILLAGE, HAROHALLI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 567 112 2. SRI SASALAIAH, S/O LATE GIRIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/AT RAMAKRISHNAIAHANADODDI BEHIND K E B, HAROHALLI VILLAGE, HAROHALLI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 112 … PETITIONERS (BY SRI. KUMAR S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46490 WP No. 34092 of 2025 VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 01. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER RAMANAGARA SUB-DIVISION RAMANAGARA -562 112 3. SMT CHIKKATHAYAMMA, W/O LATE VENKATAIAH @ MIDAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS 4. SMT LAKSHMAMMA, D/O LATE VENKATAIAH @ MIDAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS 5. SMT BABY, D/O LATE VENKATAIAH @ MIDAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 6. SRI VENKATESH, S/O LATE DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS 7. SRI GOPALA, S/O LATE DODDALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS 8. SRI MARIYAPPA, S/O LATE VENKATA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT MEDAMARANAHALLI VILLAGE, HAROHALLI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 112 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46490 WP No. 34092 of 2025 9. RAMESH R S, S/O LATE RANGAIAH, MAJOR IN AGE, R/AT NO.7, 36TH CROSS, 8TH MAIN, JAYANAGARA, BENGALURU-560 082 10. SRI KARIGOWDA, S/O LATE MARIGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS 11. SRI SHIVANNA, S/O LATE MARIGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, 12. SRI SHIVALINGEGOWDA, S/O LATE MARIGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, 13. SRI SHIVANANJEGOWDA, S/O LATE MARIGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, RESPONDENT NOS. 10 TO 13 ARE R/AT T HOSAHALLI VILLAGE, MARALAVADI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 112 14. SRI. YERRAPPA @ VENKATASWAMY S/O LATE GURUVA BHOVI RAMASAGARA VILLAGE HAROHALLI HOBLI, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46490 WP No. 34092 of 2025 HAROHALLI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562 112 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. SESHU, HCGP FOR R1 & R2; SRI VASANTH RAJ, C/R7 IN C.P. NO.24759/2025) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 27.10.2025 IN PTCL NO. 27/22, PASSED BY THE R1 I.E THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, RAMANAGARA SUB- DIVISION, RAMANAGARA, WHICH IS AT ANNEXURE-A TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER The petitioner has called in question the correctness of the order of the Assistant Commissioner dated 27.10.2025 whereby the Assistant Commissioner has recorded a finding that sale of granted land was in violation of the provisions of the prohibitions as stipulated under the PTCL Act and after recording a finding that if sale deed is null and void, has directed for restoration of the land to the family of the grantees. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46490 WP No. 34092 of 2025 2. The petitioner submits that though there is an appeal provision whereby the appeal could be filed before the Deputy Commissioner, however, the Deputy Commissioner has not entertained an appeal in the office stating that appeal could be filed in the open court sitting. 3. It is submitted that such action of the Deputy Commissioner would render the petitioner remediless as after the order of the Assistant Commissioner, action may be taken by the respondent-State as regards revenue entries and possession. It is further submitted that if no appeal is registered and action taken to consider the interim prayer sought for in such appeal, the petitioner would be seriously prejudiced. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the order of the Assistant Commissioner was passed on 27.10.2025 and curiously the revenue entries were changed on 27.10.2025 on the same day itself. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46490 WP No. 34092 of 2025 5. Learned counsel for caveator submits that it was for the petitioner to move the appeal proceedings in time. 6. No doubt there is a provision for appeal under Section 5A of the PTCL Act against the order of the Assistant Commissioner, however insofar as the affidavit filed by the petitioner to the effect that though appeal was sought to be filed, it was not entertained by the Deputy Commissioner stating that appeal to be presented in the open court sitting of the Deputy Commissioner. 7. It is necessary to observe that whenever a Quasi-Judicial authority functions as Appellate Authority, there is a duty to make arrangement to ensure that the ministerial staff of the authority must register the appeal and provide by making entry in the Register and thereafter expedite hearing of the appeal and depending on the urgency pleaded, the matter to be placed before the Quasi-Judicial authority who sits as Appellate Authority for further consideration. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46490 WP No. 34092 of 2025 8. When the matter is posted before the Appellate Authority for consideration, the Appellate Authority ought to consider the appeal and pass appropriate orders on the application for stay. This would be necessary especially in cases where sale deed is declared to be void holding that there has been breach of conditions imposed under the PTCL Act and land is directed to be restored to the grantees or his family. If no interim order is passed in the appeal expeditiously, there is possibility that the Assistant Commissioner's order may be implemented and aggrieved party may be dispossessed and revenue entry may be changed which would seriously affect the party and would render the interim order passed nugatory. 9. In the present case, it is noticed that the order of the Assistant Commissioner was passed on 27.10.2025 and on the same day itself, mutation is effected in the name of the original grantee. Even as per the procedure prescribed under the PTCL Act, once sale deed is declared to be in prejudice to the provisions of the PTCL Act, the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46490 WP No. 34092 of 2025 Government is required to assume possession of the land after following the procedure. If that were to be so, the revenue entries at the first stage will have to be transferred in the name of the State and only thereafter, after ascertaining the details of the grantee could there have been change in the revenue entries. 10. The course adopted in the present matter cannot stand legal scrutiny. It would also be well advised that wherever an order is passed and when there is a provision for appeal, the authorities as a matter of general caution being a public authority are required not to act till the period of limitation has expired which in the present case would be three months in terms of Section 5A. It is only thereafter that the authorities could take appropriate action to effectuate the order of the Assistant Commissioner. 11. Taking note that the petitioner has statutory remedy of appeal before the Deputy Commissioner and - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46490 WP No. 34092 of 2025 has approached this court directly and in light of factual contentions as pleaded, it would be appropriate that petitioner will now be relegated to the Deputy Commissioner and if the appeal is filed within 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, the same to be taken on record, appeal numbered and thereafter posted before the Deputy Commissioner on regular hearing date. The order of the Assistant Commissioner would stand stayed till the Deputy Commissioner passes appropriate orders on the application for stay to be filed along with the appeal memorandum. 12. In the present case, there would also be stay of the revenue entries effected pursuant to the impugned order which order would be subject to the orders to be passed by the Deputy Commissioner while considering the application for stay. 13. Accordingly, the petition is disposed off. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46490 WP No. 34092 of 2025 14. A copy of this order be sent to the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department to take note of the observations made herein and instruct the concerned by way of appropriate directions. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE NP