- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33646 WP No. 20307 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 20307 OF 2026 (SC/ST) BETWEEN: SRI.ASHWATHAIAH, SON OF SIDDANABHOVI, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT PEMMADEVARAHALLY, KASABA HOBLI, KORATAGERE, TUMAKURU - 572 129. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PUNITH C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LAND REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE PIN CODE: 560 001 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, TUMAKURU, PIN CODE - 572 101 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MADHUGIRI SUB DIVISION, TUMAKURU, PIN CODE - 572 132. 4. THE THASILDAR Digitally signed by V MANJUSHA BAI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33646 WP No. 20307 of 2026 KORATAGERE TALUK, TUMAKURU, PIN CODE-572 129. 5. SRI. T.S. VINAYBABU SON OF SRINIVAS, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT TUMBADI, KASABA HOBLI, KORATAGERE, TUMAKURU - 572 129. 6. SRI.RAMAKKA, WIFE OF HANUMANTHARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDNG AT DASARAHALLI, KASABA HOBLI, KORATAGERE TALUK, TUMAKURU - 572 129. 7. SMT. KADARAMMA WIFE OF NAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT DASARAHALLI, KASABA HOBLI, KORATAGERE TALUK, TUMAKURU - 572 129. 8. SRI. HANUMANTHARAYA, SON OF HANUMANTHABOVI, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, RESIDING AT PEMMADEVARAHALLY, KASABA HOBLI, KORATAGERE, TUMAKURU - 572 129. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. ANITHA N., AGA FOR R1 TO R4 VIDE ORDER DATED 06.07.2026, NOTICE TO R5 TO R8 IS DISPENSED WITH) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33646 WP No. 20307 of 2026 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 FO THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONERS UNDER SECTION 5-A OF THE PTCL ACT IN PTCL.NO NIL /2026 AS PER ANNEXURE-K1 AND ALSO TO CONSIDER THE I.A FOR STAY FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION AS PER ANNEXURE-K2. WHICH BEING FILED THROUGH E-FILING VIDE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT NO: 9449375730_260622130927 ON 22.06.2026 AS PER ANNEXURE-K2 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER The case of the petitioner is that he has purchased the land, which is the subject matter of the writ petition through Sale Deed dated 03.04.2006. In the year 2020, respondent No.3 initiated suo motu proceedings against the petitioner under Sections 4 and 5 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33646 WP No. 20307 of 2026 Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (for short, "the PTCL Act"), and thereafter passed an order adverse to the interests of the petitioner. The petitioner has challenged the same before respondent No.2 - the Deputy Commissioner, which is pending. The petitioner has also requested for interim orders before respondent No.2 against the order passed by respondent No.3 - the Assistant Commissioner. The same has not been considered. Hence, he has filed the present writ petition. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he is in possession of the writ petition schedule property from the date of purchase of the same in the year 2006. Under the said circumstances, it is submitted that he is entitled to some protection at the hands of respondent No.2 till a decision is taken by respondent No.2 on the appeal in this regard. However, in spite of the urgency, respondent No.2 has failed to consider the interim application filed by the petitioner. Hence, the present writ petition is filed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33646 WP No. 20307 of 2026 3. The learned Additional Government Advocate, upon instructions, submits that the case of the petitioner will be considered by respondent No.2 as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law. 4. Admittedly, the petitioner has purchased the property in the year 2006. After a lapse of around 14 years, respondent No.3 initiated suo motu proceedings against the petitioner. Against the orders passed by respondent No.3, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before respondent No.2, which is pending. However, still the petitioner continues to be in possession of the property. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that, respondent No.2 was required to decide on the interlocutory application filed by the petitioner forthwith. He has failed to do so. Under the given peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, interest of justice would be met, if the writ petition were to be disposed of by granting an interim order in favour of the petitioner by staying the operation of the order passed - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33646 WP No. 20307 of 2026 by respondent No.3, while directing the petitioner not to alienate the property, change the nature of the property or create any third party rights regarding the same. Hence, the following: ORDER i. The Writ Petition is hereby disposed of. ii. The order dated 12.06.2026 bearing Case No.PTCL/01/2020, passed by respondent No.3 in respect of the writ petition schedule property, vide Annexure-G to the writ petition, is hereby stayed, till the appeal filed before respondent No.2 by the petitioner is disposed of; iii. Till disposal of the appeal before respondent No.2, the petitioner shall not change the nature of the property, alienate the same or create any third party rights in respect of the same; iv. It is hereby made clear that no opinion is expressed on the merits of the case and - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33646 WP No. 20307 of 2026 respondent No.3 shall decide the appeal in accordance with law, without being influenced by any of the observations made herein above. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE CH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7