- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43157 WP No. 23699 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 23699 OF 2025 (SCST) BETWEEN: SRI. SEENAPPA S/O PATEL CHELLAPURI GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/AT BHUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, SULIBELE HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562129. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MUNIRAJA M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M. S. BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560001. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, VISHWANATHAPURA, DEVANAHALLI TALUK - 562110, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DODDABALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION, Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43157 WP No. 23699 of 2025 DODDABALLAPURA-561203, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. 4. SRI. B. V. SEETHARAMAIAH, S/O VENKATAIAH, AGED ABOUT MAJOR, R/AT KAMMAVARAPETE, HOSKOTE TOWN AND TALUK - 562114, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SESHU, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 24.06.2025 PASSED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT - DEPUTY COMMISSIONER IN CASE NO.PTCL/MIS-03/2015, AND CONSEQUENTLY TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07.07.2015 IN CASE NO.LND/SC/ST(A)34/2011-12 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BY DISMISSING THE APPEAL FOR NON-PROSECUTION IN RESPECT OF LAND BEARING SY.NO.45, NEW SY.111 MEASURING 4 ACRES SITUATED AT BHUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, SULIBNELE HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND F 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 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43157 WP No. 23699 of 2025 ORAL ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner filed a memo and seeks for dispensation of notice to respondent No.4 as respondent No.4 was placed ex-parte in the proceedings before the 2nd respondent - Deputy Commissioner. Taking note that the main relief sought for is for restoration of the proceedings that were closed on the ground of dismissal for non-prosecution, notice to respondent No.4 is dispensed with. 2. The present petition has been filed seeking for setting aside of the order at Annexure-A in case No.PTCL/MIS-03/2015. The said order at Annexure-A is an order passed in miscellaneous petition, wherein the petitioner had sought for restoration of proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner, which came to be closed by way of dismissal for non-prosecution on 07.07.2015. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the authority has taken an unduly conservative view of the matter and rejected the miscellaneous petition, thereby affirming the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43157 WP No. 23699 of 2025 order of dismissal for non-prosecution passed by the Deputy Commissioner. 4. Perused the order at Annexure-A. No doubt the Deputy Commissioner has assigned reasons for upholding the order of dismissal of default passed by the Deputy Commissioner, however, the order sheet of the proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner would also reveal that on number of dates, there were no proceedings held as well due to non-availability of the Presiding Officer. 5. It is a frequent grievance of the counsel that in most of the matters where quasi judicial authorities hold proceedings, there are no regular sittings and accordingly, many a time, hearing dates are missed and in the light of the same, absence of the petitioners in such proceedings ought not to be taken note of seriously and there must be some accommodation as well. 6. There appears to be some substance in the case made out by the petitioner that the authority has adjourned the matter on a large number of dates only on the ground - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43157 WP No. 23699 of 2025 that the Presiding Officer is attending to some other work. The default, if any, on the part of the petitioner ought not to have been treated as one that was not rectifiable. 7. In the interest of justice, taking note of substantive rights, the order passed at Annexure-A is set aside and accepting the cause shown, the miscellaneous petition is allowed. The order of the Deputy Commissioner dated 07.07.2015 is set aside. Matter is directed to be restored on file. Accordingly, the Deputy Commissioner is directed to take up the revision petition in case No.LND/SC/ST(A)34/2011-12 and after issuing notice proceed with the main proceedings. 8. Accordingly petition is disposed of. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE MCR