- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010152542025 NC: 2026:KHC:39176 WP No. 8213 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 8213 OF 2025 (SCST) BETWEEN: VEERABHADRAPPA, S/O. LATE BASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O BEERANAHALLI VILLAGE, SHIVANI HOBLI, TARIKERE TALUK - 577 547. CHICKAMAGALURU DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KANTHARAJAPPA M.G., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CHICKAMAGALURU DISTRICT, CHICKAMAGALURU - 577 101. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, TARIKERE SUB DIVISION, TARIKERE - 577 547. 3. MUNISWAMY, S/O CHIDAMBARA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/AT BURUDEKATTE VILLAGE, HOSADURGA TALUK - 577 527, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT. Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010152542025 NC: 2026:KHC:39176 WP No. 8213 of 2025 4. P.S.RAMU, S/O SADEGOUNDER, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O SIDDALINGAPPA CIRCLE, HOSAPETE TALUK - 583 201, BALARI DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.SAVITHRAMMA, AGA FOR R1 AND R2; SRI.M.R.HIREMATHAD, ADVOCATE FOR R3; R4 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) QUASHING ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN PTL/2/2019-20 DATED 04/02/2025 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-E TO THE WRIT PETITION AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN SC/ST/10/2010-11 DATED 24/03/2017 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-D TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC., 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 1. The land which is the subject matter of the writ petition was granted in favour of the original grantee in the year 1978. He belonged to Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes community. The land was sold in the year 1993 without obtaining necessary permission from the State as contemplated under Section 4(2) of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010152542025 NC: 2026:KHC:39176 WP No. 8213 of 2025 (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 ('PTCL' Act). The said sale was challenged for the first time in the year 2010 by making an application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act, by the legal representative of the original grantee. The Assistant Commissioner has allowed the application and the Deputy Commissioner has dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner herein. Aggrieved by the same, the present petition is filed. 2. The case of the petitioner is that there has been an unreasonable delay on the part of the legal representative of the original grantee in challenging the sale. Inspite of it, both the Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner have erroneously passed the impugned orders in favour of the legal representative of the original grantee. On the said ground, he prays that the writ petition may be allowed as prayed for. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.3, as well as the learned Additional Government Advocate justifies the impugned orders and pray for dismissal of the writ petition. 4. Respondent No.4 served, though unrepresented. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010152542025 NC: 2026:KHC:39176 WP No. 8213 of 2025 5. The only question that arises for consideration is, whether there has been any inordinate and unreasonable delay on the part of the legal representatives of the original grantee in making an application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act. 6. Admittedly, the grant was made in the year 1978. The sale took place in the year 1993. However, the challenge to the sale by making an application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act, has been made only in the year 2010 and there has been a delay of around 17 years in making the said application. The said delay is unexplained. Under the given facts and circumstances, the said delay has to be considered as unreasonable. As per the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in NEKKANTI RAMA LAKSHMI VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA 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, such unreasonable delay will become fatal to the case of the original grantee/legal representatives of the grantee. Hence, the following: 1 (2020) 14 SCC 232 - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010152542025 NC: 2026:KHC:39176 WP No. 8213 of 2025 ORDER (i) The Writ Petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 24.03.2017 bearing No.SC/ST/10/2010-11 passed by respondent No.2- Assisant Commissioner vide Annexure - D to the writ petition, is hereby set aside. (iii) The impugned order dated 04.02.2025 in PTL/2/2019-20 passed by respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner vide Annexure - E to the writ petition, is hereby set aside. (iv) The application filed under Section 5 of the PTCL Act, by respondent No.4 stands dismissed. (v) The State Authorities are thereby directed to change the revenue entries in the name of the present purchaser of the land. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE tsn* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 54