- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34778 WP No. 3056 of 2026 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. 3056 OF 2026 (SCST) BETWEEN: LAKSHMANA, S/O LATE CHOWDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, RESIDING AT TUPALLI VILLAGE, J. THIMMASANDRA POST, KASABA HOBLI, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 135. (BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN NOT CLAIMED) …PETITIONER (BY SRI B RAMESH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU 560 001, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR-563 101. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KOLAR SUB DIVISION, KOLAR-563 101. 4. SMT. RAMAKKA W/O. VENKATESHAPPA, D/O GULLAPALLI VENKATESHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS 5. SMT. YELLAMMA W/O. CHIKKA VENKATESHAPPA Digitally signed by V MANJUSHA BAI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34778 WP No. 3056 of 2026 D/O GULLAPALLI VENKATESHAPPA AGED 49 YEARS 6. SRI ANJINAPPA S/O.GULLAPALLI VENKATESHAPPA AGED 47 YEARS, 7. SRI AKHILA, S/O. LATE MANJUNATHA, AGED 23 YEARS RESPONDENTS NO.4 TO 7 ARE RESIDING AT J.V.COLONY VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 135. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT SHARADA H V AGA FOR R1 TO R3, SRI M SHIVAPRAKASH, ADV. FOR R4 TO R7(ABSENT)) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A. ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI BY QUASH THE ORDER DATED 22.12.2025 PASSED IN CASE NO.PTCL NO.143/2025 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN SO FAR A DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF SY NO.291/3 OLD SY NO.291 MEASURING TO AN EXTENT OF 0-30 GUNTAS AND THE ORDER DATED 12.08.2025 PASSED IN CASE NO. PTCL 09/2021-22 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT WHICH IS PRODUCED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-J AND H. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER The land which is the subject matter of the writ petition was granted in favour of the original grantee on the ground that he - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34778 WP No. 3056 of 2026 belongs to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the year 1965. Respondent Nos.4 to 7 are the legal heirs of the original grantee. A portion of the said land was first alienated in the year 1997 and thereafter, the remaining portion in the year 1999. Presently, the petitioner is the owner of a portion of the property. For the first time, an application was made by respondent Nos.4 to 7 before respondent No.3-Assistant Commissioner under Section 5 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 ('PTCL Act') in the year 2021 after a lapse of 24 years. The third respondent allowed the application. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner preferred an appeal before the second respondent/Deputy Commissioner which has been dismissed. Against the said orders, the present writ petition is filed. 2. The case of the petitioner is that there is an unreasonable delay in challenging the sale made and under the circumstances, the same is fatal to the case of respondent Nos.4 to 7 as per the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in NEKKANTI RAMA LAKSHMI VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34778 WP No. 3056 of 2026 AND ANOTHER1 as well as the decision of this Court in the case of R. Suresh Mohan vs. State of Karnataka and Others in W.P. No.3597/2018. For the said reason, it is prayed that the impugned orders are liable to be set aside. 3. During the course of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though he has challenged the provisions of Section 5 of PTCL Act he does not press for the said relief. 4. Counsel for the respondent Nos.4 to 7 is absent. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate though justifies the impugned order is unable to dispute the fact that there has been an unreasonable delay on the part of respondent Nos.4 to 7 in challenging the same and hence, the impugned orders are in contravention with the order passed by this Court in W.P. No.3597/2018 and the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in NEKKANTI RAMA LAKSHMI, supra. 6. On the ground of unreasonable delay on the part of the respondent Nos.4 to 7 in preferring an application under Section 5 1 (2020) 14 SCC 232 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34778 WP No. 3056 of 2026 of the PTCL Act, the impugned orders passed by respondent Nos.3 and 2 are liable to be set aside. Hence, the following: ORDER i) Petition is allowed. ii) The impugned order dated 12.08.2025 bearing No.PTCL/09/2021 passed by respondent No.3 vide Annexure-H to the writ petition is hereby set aside. iii) The impugned order dated 22.12.2025 bearing No.PTCL/143/2025 passed by respondent No.2 vide Annexure-J to the writ petition is hereby set aside. iv) The application filed under Section 5 of the PTCL Act by respondents Nos.4 to 7 before respondent No.3 stands dismissed. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE CHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 59