- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010705332024 NC: 2026:KHC:39518 WP No. 33504 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 33504 OF 2024 (SC/ST) BETWEEN: 1. B. GOVINDAPPA S/O. KENGABASAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS. 2. H.B. VEERANNA, S/O. KENGABASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS. 3. H.B. HANUMANTHAPPA S/O. KENGABASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS. 4. B. MAHANTESH, S/O. KENGBASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS. ALL ARE AGRICULTURIST, RESIDENT OF HARALEKATTE VILLAGE, HISSAMUDRA POST, BHARAMASAGARA HOBLI CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 519. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRITHVIRAJ SHASTRY G, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. G. BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010705332024 NC: 2026:KHC:39518 WP No. 33504 of 2024 AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, CHITRADURGA - 577 519. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, CHITRDURGA SUB DIVISION, CHITRADURGA - 577 519. 3. SMT. KATAMMA, W/O. LATE JAGALURAPPA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, DODDERI VILLAGE, CHALLAKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 522. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BHAIRAV KUTTAIAH, AGA FOR R1 AND R2; SRI. M.T. JAGAN MOHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R3 (ABSENT)) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, CHITRADURGA IN NO.PTCL-35/2022 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010705332024 NC: 2026:KHC:39518 WP No. 33504 of 2024 ORAL ORDER The land which is the subject matter of the writ petition was granted in favour of the husband of respondent No.3 in the year 1970. He belonged to the Scheduled Caste / Scheduled Tribe Community. He has sold the land in favour of one Kengabasappa in the year 1988 and the petitioners are the legal representatives of the said deceased Kengabasappa. Respondent No.3, for the first time, filed 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') in the year 2014. Respondent No.2 - the Assistant Commissioner has allowed the application and has ordered for resumption and restoration of the land in favour of respondent No.3. The appeal preferred by the petitioners has been dismissed by respondent No.1 - the Deputy Commissioner. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010705332024 NC: 2026:KHC:39518 WP No. 33504 of 2024 2. The case of petitioners is that, there has been an inordinate delay of 26 years in challenging the sale. Ignoring the said fact, the impugned orders have been passed. Hence, they pray for allowing the writ petition. 3. The learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 is absent. 4. The learned Additional Government Advocate justifies the impugned orders and prays for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. The only question that arises for consideration is, whether there has been any unreasonable delay on the part of respondent No.3 in preferring the application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act. 6. Admittedly, the land was sold in the year 1988 and the application filed under Section 5 of the PTCL Act was made in the year 2014. The delay of 26 years from the date of sale has not been satisfactorily explained by respondent No.3. Under the given peculiar facts and - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010705332024 NC: 2026:KHC:39518 WP No. 33504 of 2024 circumstances of the case, the delay has to be considered unreasonable. 7. As per the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of NEKKANTI RAMA LAKSHMI VS. 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, has held that any unreasonable delay in making the application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act becomes fatal. Hence, the following: ORDER i. The Writ Petition is hereby allowed. ii. The impugned order dated 23.08.2022 bearing Case No. ಎ....ಎ...ಎ:8/2015-16 passed by respondent No.2 vide Annexure - B to the writ petition is hereby set aside. - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010705332024 NC: 2026:KHC:39518 WP No. 33504 of 2024 iii. The impugned order dated 06.11.2024 bearing No. ಎ-35/2022 passed by respondent No.1 vide Annexure - A to the writ petition is hereby set aside. iv. The application filed under Section 5 of the PTCL Act filed by respondent No.3 before respondent No.2 - the Assistant Commissioner stands dismissed. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE CH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42