- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40988-DB W.A. No.971/2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT APPEAL NO.971/2023 (SC-ST) BETWEEN: SRI. B.L. RAJAPPA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS S/O LATE LAKSHMAIAH R/AT. SHAKTHI NAGAR BETTAHALASUR POST, JALA HOBLI BANGALORE NORTH TALUK - 562157. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHIVAKUMAR D.A. ADV.,) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT BANGALORE - 560 009. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DODDABALLAPUR SUB-DIVISION DODDABALLAPUR-561203. 3. SRI. PILLANJANAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS S/O LATE MUNIDODDAIAH. 4. SRI. RAJAGOPAL AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS S/O LATE MUNIDODDAIAH. RESPONDENTS NO.3 & 4 ARE R/AT YELIYUR VILLAGE CHANNARAYAPTNA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 157. Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: High Court Of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40988-DB W.A. No.971/2023 5. SRI. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS S/O SRI. MUNISHAMAPPA. 6. SMT. ANJINAMMA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS W/O LATE THAMMANNA. 7. SMT. SHANTHAMMA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS D/O LATE THAMMANNA. 8. SMT. SUMITHRA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS D/O LATE THAMMANNA. 9. SMT. MANJULA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS D/O LATE THAMMANNA. 10. SMT. SHYLAJA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS D/O LATE THAMMANNA. RESPONDENTS NO.5 TO 10 ARE RESIDING AT YELIYUR VILLAGE CHANNARAYAPATNA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562157. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. PRAMODHINI KISHAN, AGA FOR R1 & R2) - - - THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS IN W.P.NO.7369/2020 AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 23.05.2023 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SINGLE JUDGE BY ALLOWING THE WRIT APPEAL. ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 05.08.2019 IN NO.LND/SC-ST/10/2014-25 AND NO.LND/SC- - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40988-DB W.A. No.971/2023 ST/11/2014-15 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT - DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE AS PER ANNEXURE-B & ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) This appeal is filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, challenging the order dated 23.05.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.7369/2020. 2. Sri.Shivakumar D.A., learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the learned Single Judge has committed a grave error in appreciating the fact and law. It is submitted that the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') does not stipulate the time limit for filing an application for restoration of land. It is further submitted that the sale is within 5 years from the date of grant - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40988-DB W.A. No.971/2023 and without prior permission from the Government which has been rightly appreciated by the Authorities and the sale in question being void, the order of restoration passed by the respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner, Doddaballapur. However, the order of restoration has been wrongfully set aside by the respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner and the order of the Deputy Commissioner has been erroneously upheld by the learned Single Judge. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal. 3. Per contra, Smt.Pramodhini Kishan, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 supports the order of the learned Single Judge and seeks to dismiss the appeal. 4. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 and meticulously perused the material available on record. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions made on both sides. 5. The records indicate that the land in question was granted in favour of the father of the appellant on 13.12.1961 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40988-DB W.A. No.971/2023 and the original grantee sold the subject land in favour of K.Ramachar under the registered sale deed dated 06.10.1966 and inturn, he sold in favour of M.Krishnamachar under the registered sale deed dated 20.11.1967. The said M.Krishnamachar sold the property in favour of Munidoddaiah, the father of the respondent Nos.3 and 4 under the registered sale deed dated 17.03.1995. The appellants claiming to the be the sons of the original grantee, initiated the proceedings under the provisions of the Act in the year 2007-08 which is more than 28 years from the date of sale. The learned Single Judge, considering the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NEKKANTI RAMA LAKSHMI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER1, VIVEK M.HINDUJA Vs. M.ASWATHA2, CHHEDI LAL YADAV Vs. HARI KISHORE YADAV3 and NINGAPPA Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS4 held that the order of restoration passed by the respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner is beyond 28 years from the date of sale and the initiation of proceedings is not 1 (2020) 14 SCC 232 2 (2019) 1 Kant.L.J. 819 SC 3 (2018) 12 SCC 527 4 (2020) 14 SCC 236 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40988-DB W.A. No.971/2023 within the reasonable time and dismissed the writ petition. We do not find any error calling for interference in this appeal. 6. For the aforementioned reasons, the appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2