- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34702 WP No. 12405 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.12405 OF 2021 (SC/ST) BETWEEN: 1. S NATARAJA GUPTA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS S/O LATE SREERANGASHETTY HULIYAR CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VINAYA KEERTHY M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TUMAKURU DISTRICT TUMAKURU-572 101. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TIPTUR SUB-DIVISION TIPTUR, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 101. 3. RANGASWAMY AGEDA BOUT 45 YEARS S/O PUTTAHANUMAIAH Digitally signed by V MANJUSHA BAI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34702 WP No. 12405 of 2021 HOSALLI VILLAGE THIMLAPURA, HULIYAR HOBLI, CN HALLI TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 101. …RESPONDENTS [BY SMT. SHARADA H.V., AGA., FOR R.1 AND R.2; SRI. THIPPESWAMY T., ADVOCATE FOR R.3 (ABSENT)] THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED UNDATED ORDER IN CASE NO.PTCL.17/2005-06 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 (ANNEXURE-C) AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22.08.2005 IN CASE NO.PTCL.SK.32/2004-05 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 (ANNEXURE-A), ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER 1. The land which is the subject matter of the writ petition was granted in favour of the forefather of respondent no.3 on the ground that he belonged to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe. The grant was made in the year 1963. The land was first sold in the year 1968. Presently, the petitioner is said to be the owner of the said - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34702 WP No. 12405 of 2021 land. On the ground that the alienation was in violation of the terms and conditions of the grant, an application under Section 5 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (for short "the PTCL Act") was filed before respondent no.2 for the first time in the year 2005, after a lapse of about 37 years. The said application has been allowed by respondent no.2. The appeal filed by the petitioner before respondent no.1 has been dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. 2. The case of the petitioner is that there has been an inordinate delay of 37 years and the same is unexplained and the said delay cannot be considered to be reasonable. Reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Nekkanti Rama Lakshmi v. State of Karnataka and Another reported in (2020) 14 SCC 232 as well as the decision of this Court in R.Suresh Mohan v. State of Karnataka and Others in W.P.No.3597/2018, disposed of on 06.07.2026. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34702 WP No. 12405 of 2021 3. Learned counsel for respondent no.3 is absent. 4. Learned AGA appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 though justifies the impugned orders, is unable to dispute the fact that there has been an unreasonable delay of 37 years in challenging the sale and that the ratio laid down in the aforementioned judgments requires allowing the instant writ petition. Hence, the following:- ORDER i. The writ petition is hereby allowed. ii. The impugned order in Case No.PTCL.17/2005-06 passed by respondent No.1 (vide Annexure-'C' to the writ petition) is hereby set aside. iii. The impugned order dated 22.08.2005 bearing No.£ÀA.¦n¹J¯ï 32/04-05 passed by respondent No.2 (vide Annexure-'A' to the writ petition) is hereby set aside. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34702 WP No. 12405 of 2021 iv. The petition filed before respondent No.2 by respondent No.3 is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE VMB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33