- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31380 WP No. 46835 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 46835 OF 2016 (LR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. VANI BASAVARAJ M. P. W/O. LATE BASAVARAJ AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 2. PRAPHULLA B D/O. LATE BASAVARAJ AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS. 3. PAVITHRA B D/O. LATE BASAVARAJ AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS 4. SRI. HARSHA S/O. LATE BASAVARAJ AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT NO.62, 5TH CROSS BAPUJI LAYOUT, NEAR CHANDRA LAYOUT VIJAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 040. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. JAGADISH K N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560 001. 2. THE CHAIRMAN LAND TRIBUNAL, SHIDLAGHATTA TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562105. Digitally signed by DHANALAKSHMI MURTHY Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31380 WP No. 46835 of 2016 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT CHIKKABALLAPURA-562101. 4. B. DEVRAJ GRAND S/O. ANGADI NANJUNDAPPA S/O. CHIKKA BYRAPPA MAJOR R/AT BEEDIGANAHALLI CHENNARAYAPATNA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562110. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SHARADA H V, AGA. FOR R1 TO R3: SRI. A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R-2 IN LRF NO.194/1975- 76, DATED:13.10.1981 VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R-3 IN DLRA(R) 35/1990 IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL FOR NON PROSECUTION DATED:18.5.1990 VIDE ANNEXURE-A BY RESTORING THE SAME IN ORDER TO DISPOSE OF THE SAME ON MERITS 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 1. The petitioners are assailing the order dated 13.10.1981 (Annexure-C) passed by respondent No.2 in LRF No.194/1975-76 and the order dated 18.05.1990 in DLRA(R) No.35/1990, dismissing the appeal preferred against the order dated 13.10.1981. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31380 WP No. 46835 of 2016 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that the order passed by the Land Tribunal on 13.10.1981 was questioned before the Land Reforms Appellate Authority and thereafter, the Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal. Thereafter, the petitioners preferred W.P.No.29930/2001, and this Court, by order dated 24.03.2004, dismissed the petition as not maintainable. However, liberty was reserved to the petitioners to approach the competent authority. In this regard, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that an endorsement has been issued by the respondent No.2 as per Annexure-A, and therefore, learned counsel sought for interference by this Court. 3. Per contra, Sri A. Keshava Bhat, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4, submitted that the writ petition itself is not maintainable on the sole ground that the order impugned in this writ petition has already been considered by this Court in W.P.No.29930/2001, produced - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31380 WP No. 46835 of 2016 at Annexure-E to the writ petition. Accordingly, learned counsel sought for dismissal of the petition. 4. The learned AGA submitted that there is a delay of nearly 8 years in approaching this Court and accordingly sought for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, it is not in dispute that the Land Tribunal, by order dated 13.10.1981, conferred occupancy rights in respect of grand father of respondent No.4, and the said order of the Land Tribunal was confirmed by the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Kolar, in DLRA (R) No.35/1990. It is forthcoming from the writ petition that the Land Reforms Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioners herein, and the same was confirmed by this Court in W.P.No.29930/2001 by order dated 24.03.2004 (Annexure-E). 6. In that view of the matter, I find force in the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31380 WP No. 46835 of 2016 respondent No.4 that the petitioners cannot agitate the very same rights before this Court in a subsequent writ petition. That apart, by looking into the endorsement dated 23.12.2008, it is evident that the petitioners have approached this Court after more than 8 years from the endorsement dated 23.12.2008 (Annexure-A). In this regard, no sufficient cause has been shown by the petitioners to condone the delay of more than 8 years. 7. In that view of the matter, following the declaration made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of H.GURUSWAMY & ORS. vs. A.KRISHNAIAH (DEAD by LRS) reported in 2025 SCC ONLINE SC 54, I am of the view that no interference is called for in this petition. 8. Accordingly, petition is dismissed. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE HA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 50