- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010290202025 NC: 2026:KHC:38688 WP No. 14788 of 2025 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. 14788 OF 2025 (SCST-) BETWEEN: 1. RANGASWAMY S/O LATE VENKATAGIRI BHOVI AGED ABOUT 73 YEAR R/OF YALACHIPALYA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562 160. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.PURANDARA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE TAHASILDAR CHANNAPATNA TALUK CHANNAPATNA RAMANAGAR DISTRICT-562 160. 2. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER RAMANAGARA SUB DIVISION RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562 159. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER RAMANAGARA DISTRICT RAMANAGARA-562 159. Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010290202025 NC: 2026:KHC:38688 WP No. 14788 of 2025 4. RAJAMMA CLAIMING TO BE D/O LATE MASTAMMA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS 5. VENKATAMMA CLAIMING TO BE D/O LATE MASTAMMA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS RESPONDENT NOS.4 AND 5 ARE R/OF YELACHIPALYA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BHAIRAV KUTTAIAH, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. R.VENU, ADVOCATE FOR R4 AND R5) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 13.03.2024 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 HEREIN IN PROCEEDINGS BEARING NO.PTCL/07/2021-22 AT ANNEXURE-A ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF RESPONDENT NOS.4 AND 5 FOR SETTING ASIDE THE SALE DEED DATED 30.08.1994 AT ANNEXURE-D IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER AS INVALID AND FOR RESTORATION OF THE LAND IN FAVOUR OF RESPONDENT NOS.4 AND 5 AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010290202025 NC: 2026:KHC:38688 WP No. 14788 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER 1. The land which is the subject matter of writ petition was granted in favour of the original grantee in the year 1978. She belonged to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe community. The land was sold in the year 1994. An application under Section 5 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (for short 'PTCL Act') challenging the said sale was made in the year 2021. Respondent no.2-Assistant Commissioner has passed an order in favour of the legal representatives of the original grantee. Respondent no.3-Deputy Commissioner has dismissed the appeal filed by the purchaser. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. 2. The case of the purchaser is that, the legal representatives of the original grantee have challenged the sale after an unreasonable delay of more than 26 years. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010290202025 NC: 2026:KHC:38688 WP No. 14788 of 2025 On the said ground, it is prayed that the writ petition be allowed. 3. Learned AGA as well as the counsel appearing for respondent nos.4 and 5 justify the impugned orders and pray for dismissal of the writ petition. 4. The only question that arises for consideration in the instant writ petition is, whether the sale made has been challenged belatedly and is there an unreasonable delay in the same. 5. Admittedly, the grant was of the year 1978 and without obtaining the necessary government permission the sale was made in the year 1994. The said sale is in violation of Section 4(2) of the PTCL Act. However, a challenge to the same has been made belatedly in the year 2021 i.e. 27 years delay from the date of sale. The delay is not explained by respondent nos.4 and 5. Under the given facts and circumstances of the case, the delay will have to be considered unreasonable. As per the - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010290202025 NC: 2026:KHC:38688 WP No. 14788 of 2025 judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Nekkanti Rama Lakshmi vs. State of Karnataka and Another reported in (2020) 14 SCC 232 as well as the decision of this Court in the case of R.Suresh Mohan v. State of Karnataka and Others in W.P.No.3597/2018, the unreasonable delay becomes fatal to the case of original grantee/legal representatives of original grantee. 6. Hence, the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed; (ii) The impugned order dated 13.03.2024 passed by respondent no.2 bearing no.¦n¹J¯ï/07/2021-22 vide Annexure-A to the writ petition is hereby set aside; (iii) The impugned order dated 20.03.2025 passed by respondent no.3 bearing no.¦n¹J¯ï/03/2024 vide Annexure-B to the writ petition is hereby set aside; - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010290202025 NC: 2026:KHC:38688 WP No. 14788 of 2025 (iv) The application made under Section 5 of the PTCL Act by respondent nos.4 and 5 before respondent no.2 is hereby dismissed. Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of. SD/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19