- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010520072024 NC: 2026:KHC:38801 WP No. 24621 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.24621 OF 2024 (SC/ST) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SUNITHA K.N. W/O G M HARSHAVARDHAN AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/O #.355, MANJUNATHASWAMY NILAYA, RAGHAVENDRA SAW MILL ROAD, GAYATHRI BADAVANE, CHANNARAYAPATTANA-573116 HASSAN DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. UMA SHANKAR M N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPTD BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HASSAN DISTRICT HASSAN - 571231. Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010520072024 NC: 2026:KHC:38801 WP No. 24621 of 2024 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HASSAN SUB DIVISION HASSAN - 571231. 4. SMT. NANJAMMA W/O LATE LAKKAIAH @ DODDAIAH, AGED MAJOR R/O YACHENAHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI- 560078 CHANNARAYAPATTANA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT. 5. AARIFULLAKHAN AGED MAJOR S/O KHALEEFULLA KHAN R/O OPPOSITE TAPCMS MYSURU ROAD, CHANNARAYAPATTANA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT-562160. 6. VENKATARAMAIAH C K AGED MAJOR S/O SHYANUBHOG SURAPPA. 7. SMT. PUTTATHAYAMMA AGED MAJOR W/O VENKATARAMAIAH C K R/O KOTE STREET, CHANNARAYAPATTANA TOWN HASSAN DISTRICT-562160. 8. SMT. NAGALAKSHMI W/O NARASIMHAN AGED MAJOR GAYATHRI BADAVANE CHANNARAYAPATTANA HASSAN DISTRICT-562160. 9. SRI NANJUNDEGOWDA - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010520072024 NC: 2026:KHC:38801 WP No. 24621 of 2024 S/O BOREGOWDA AGED MAJOR R/O SOMANAHALLI VILLAGE BAGURU HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATTANA HASSAN DISTRICT-562160. 10. SRI DHARMENDRA D AGED MAJOR S/O DYAVEGOWDA R/O KUVEMPUNAGARA BADAVANE, CHANNARAYAPATTANA HASSAN DISTRICT-562160. 11. SRI ZAHEER AHMED AGED MAJOR S/O ABDUL KHADAR C M R/O NO.229, GANDHI CIRCLE BADAVANE, CHANNARAYAPATTANA HASSAN DISTRICT-562160. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA., AGA., FOR R.1 TO R.3; SRI. KUMAR K.G., ADVOCATE FOR R.4; VIDE ORDER DATED 04.09.2024 NOTICE TO R.5 TO R.11 IS DISPENSED WITH.) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 20.08.2024 IN CASE NO.PTCL.03/2022-23 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2/THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HASSAN, HASSAN DISTRICT, AT ANNEXURE-A., ETC. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010520072024 NC: 2026:KHC:38801 WP No. 24621 of 2024 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 the year 1960, in favour of a person belonging to the Scheduled Caste / Scheduled Tribe community. It was sold for the first time in the year 1969. Presently, the petitioner is the owner of the property. The Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (for short, "the PTCL Act") came into force with effect from 01.01.1979. For the first time, an application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act was filed in the year 2014 by the legal representatives of the original grantee. The said application came to be dismissed by the Assistant Commissioner on the ground of inordinate delay. Aggrieved by the same, the legal representatives of the original grantee filed - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010520072024 NC: 2026:KHC:38801 WP No. 24621 of 2024 an appeal before the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner. The Deputy Commissioner allowed the appeal and ordered for resumption and restoration of the land in favour of the legal representatives of the original grantee. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed by the purchasers. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the second respondent - Deputy Commissioner has allowed the appeal in violation of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Nekkanti Rama Lakshmi v. State of Karnataka and Another reported in (2020) 14 SCC 232 and has not considered the inordinate delay in filing the appeal. On the said ground, it is prayed that the impugned order passed by the second respondent be set aside. 3. Per contra, the learned AGA appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and the learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondent sought to justify the impugned order and prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 4. The question that arises for consideration is whether there has been any inordinate and unreasonable delay on the - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010520072024 NC: 2026:KHC:38801 WP No. 24621 of 2024 part of the legal representatives of the original grantee in filing an application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act. 5. Admittedly, the grant is of the year 1960. The sale is of the year 1969. The PTCL Act came into force with effect from 01.01.1979 and the challenge to the sale is made for the first time in the year 2014. There has been a delay of 45 years in filing an application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act, since the date of sale and 35 years delay in challenging the same, from the date of Act coming into force. The said delay is unexplained. Under the given facts and circumstances of the case, the same has to be treated as unreasonable. As per the decision 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, an unreasonable delay in filing an application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act, becomes fatal to the case of the legal heirs of the original grantee. Hence, the following:- - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010520072024 NC: 2026:KHC:38801 WP No. 24621 of 2024 ORDER i. The writ petition is hereby allowed. ii. The impugned order dated 20.08.2024 bearing No.¦n¹J¯ï.03/2022-23 passed by respondent No.2 (vide Annexure-'A' to the writ petition) is hereby set aside. SD/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE VMB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42