- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34152 WP No. 41124 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 41124 OF 2010 (KVOA) BETWEEN: GUDDAPPA @ AGASANAKATTE PYLVAN GUDDAPPA S/O AGASANAKATTTE RAMAPPA SINCE DEAD BY LR'S 1 SMT NAGAMMA W/O LATE GUDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/AT OPP. TO SRI PAKIRASWAMY MATH, HALLADAKERI, SHIMOGA ROAD, HARIHARA, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577 601. 2. SMT PRAMILA W/O N D CHANDAPUR D/O LATE GUDDAPPA, 3. RAMANNA @ RAMAPPA S/O LATE GUDDAPPA SINCE DEAD BY LR'S 3(a) GANGAMMA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, W/O LATE RAMANNA 3(b) A.R. NAGAMANI, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, D/O LATE RAMANNA 3(c) A.R. CHANDANA, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34152 WP No. 41124 of 2010 D/O LATE RAMANNA 3(d) A.R. AMULYA, AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, D/o LATE RAMAΝΝΑ, SINCE MINOR, REPRESENTED BY HER NATURAL GUARDIAN & MOTHER GANGAMMA 4. A G MANJUNATH AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS S/O LATE GUDDAPPA 5. A G RAVI S/O LATE GUDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT OPP TO SRI PAKIRASWAMY MATH, HALLADAKERI, SHIMOGA ROAD, HARIHARA, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577 601. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. H KANTHA RAJA & ROHITH D K .,ADVOCATE FOR P2 TO P5 ARE TREATED AS LR'S OF DECEASED P1; SRI. RAVI H.K., ADVOCATE FOR LR'S OF DECEASED P3(i.e), P3 (A TO D) SRI. M. VINAYA KEERTHI., ADVOCATE FOR P2, P3 (A TO D), P4, AND P5 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVT REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M S BUILDING BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34152 WP No. 41124 of 2010 DAVANAGERE. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DAVANAGERE SUB-DIVISION DAVANAGERE. 4. THE TAHSILDAR HARIHAR TALUK, HARIHAR, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. 5. RAMMAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS S/O BHARMAPPA R/AT 2ND MAIN ROAD, A K COLONY, HARIHAR DAVANAGERE DISTRICT -577 601. 6. H D HANUMANTHAPPA AGED 52 YEARS S/O MARIYAPPA R/AT 2ND MAIN ROAD, A K COLONY, HARIHAR DAVANAGERE DISTRICT,. 7. HARIHARAPPA S/O BASAPPA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR'S 7a) LAXMAMMA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, W/O LATE HARIHARAPPA 7b) BASAVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, S/O LATE HARIHARAPPA 7c) VARIJA, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, D/O LATE HARIHARAPPA 7d) SADANANDA, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34152 WP No. 41124 of 2010 S/O LATE HARIHARAPPA 8. D SADASHIVAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS S/O DURUGAPPA 9. HARI KUMAR AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS S/O BHARMAPPA 10. BHARMAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS S/O HANUMAPPA 11. HALAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS S/O SHIVARAMAPPA 12. CHANNABASAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS S/O BASAPPA 12(a) HULIGEMMA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, W/O LATE CHANNABASAPPA 12(b) SAVITHRAMMA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, D/O LATE CHANNABASAPPA 12(c) SHAKUNTALA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, D/O LATE CHANNABASAPPA 12(d) VIJAYA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, D/O LATE CHANNABASAPPA 12(e) SHIVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, S/O LATE CHANNABASAPPA - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34152 WP No. 41124 of 2010 13. RAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS S/O MARIYAPPA 14. ERAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS S/O HARIYAPPA 15. HALAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS S/O HANUMAPPA 16. NINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS S/O BASAPPA SINCE DEAD BY LR'S 16(a) KARIYAMMA @ MEENAKSHAMMA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, W/o LATE NINGAPPA 16(b) REKHA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, D/O LATE NINGAPPA 16(c) KAVYA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, D/O LATE NINGAPPA 16(d) MANJUNATH, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, S/O LATE NINGAPPA 16(e) KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, S/O LATE NINGAPPA 16(f) RAMESH, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, S/O LATE NINGAPPA 16(g) SAVITHRAMMA, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34152 WP No. 41124 of 2010 D/O LATE NINGAPPA ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF 2ND MAIN ROAD, AK COLONY, HARIHARA-577 601, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT, BANGALORE. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SRINIVAS KUMAR M., HCGP FOR R1 TO R4; SRI. T.N. RAGHAVENDRA RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R5, R6, R8 TO R11 AND R13 TO R15; R7 (A TO D) ARE SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED V/O DATED 03.04.2013 PETITION ABATES AS AGAINST R12 AND R16) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 29.11.2010 VIDE ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 BY ISSUING A WRIT OF CERTIORARI AS ILLEGAL. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER 1. Order being challenged by the petitioners is passed by respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner, Davanagere, as produced at Annexure-A dated 29.11.2010, in terms of which the respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner has held alienation of an extent of 8 guntas of land forming - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34152 WP No. 41124 of 2010 part of land in Sy.No.2 of Mahajanalli Village, Harihara Taluk, Davanagere District, to be in violation of the provisions of Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961 (Act, 1961 for brevity). Further the respondent No.2- Deputy Commissioner in exercise of his power under Section 7A of the Act, 1961 resumed the land. 2. Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Act, 1961 provides for filing of an appeal before the District Judge of the District within 90 days of such decision and decision of the District Judge on such appeal would be final. 3. In view of the aforesaid statutory provision, learned counsel for the petitioners after arguing the matter for some time seeks for liberty to file statutory appeal before the District Court. 4. Learned HCGP, appearing for the respondents-authorities, has no objection for the same. 5. Heard. Perused the records. 6. The impugned order has been passed on 29.11.2010. The writ petition has been filed on 16.12.2010, which is within - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34152 WP No. 41124 of 2010 the time contemplated under sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Act. In that view of the matter, reserving liberty to the petitioners to avail such statutory remedy, petition is disposed of. 7. The time consumed in prosecution of this petition be considered for the purpose of limitation, if appeal is filed within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. All contentions are kept open. 8. This Court by order dated 10.01.2011 had granted interim protection restraining the respondents from dispossessing the petitioners until further orders. The said interim order is extended till petitioners filing the appeal and obtaining appropriate orders before the District Court. SD/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RU, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2