- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010093512019 NC: 2026:KHC:42114 WP No. 14103 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 14103 OF 2019 (SCST) BETWEEN: 1. DODDA PAPAIAH SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS. NARASAMMA W/O LATE DODDA PAPAIAH AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS 2. CHANNAKRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS S/O LATE DODDA PAPAIAH 3. D.NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS S/O LATE DODDA PAPAIAH R/AT MEENAKUNTE VILLAGE JALA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT-562 157. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHIVARAJU M.K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S.BUILDINGS BENGALURU-560 001. REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010093512019 NC: 2026:KHC:42114 WP No. 14103 of 2019 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT CHIKKABALLAPURA-562 101. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CHIKKABALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION CHIKKABALLAPURA-562 101. 4. T.C.VENKATARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS S/O CHIKKA VENKATAPPA 5. MUNIVENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS S/O CHIKKA VENKATAPPA R4 AND R5 ARE R/OF THIMMANAHALLI VILLAGE NANDI HOBLI CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562 103. 6. K.N.GOVINDAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS. SMT. SARASWATHAMMA MAJOR W/O LATE K.N.GOVINDAPPA 7. SMT. ASHWATHAMMA MAJOR W/O LATE K.N.GOVINDAPPA 8. K.G.RAMANJANYA MAJOR S/O LATE K.N.GOVINDAPPA 9. K.N.MUNEGOWDA MAJOR, S/O SRI. NARAYANAPPA - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010093512019 NC: 2026:KHC:42114 WP No. 14103 of 2019 10. K.G.SHAYMALA MAJOR W/O H.G.BACHE GOWDA 11. SMT. MUNIRATHNAMMA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS W/O SRI. MANJU REDDY R6 TO R11 ARE R/OF THIMMANAHALLI VILAGE NANDI HOBLI CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562 103. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; VIDE ORDER DATED 22.09.2022, STEPS TO DECEASED R9 IS DISPENSED WITH; VIDE ORDER DATED 31.01.2025 NOTICE TO R5 IS HELD SUFFICIENT; R4, R6, R7, R8, R10 AND R11 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 04.08.2014 (ANNEXURE-'D') PASSED IN RA/SCST/37/2012-13 BY RESPONDENT NO.2 AND ORDER DATED 28.09.2012 (ANNEXURE-C) PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 IN CASE NO.PTCL/CHIKKA/78/2006-07 IN RESPECT OF LAND BEARING SY.NO.46/1 MEASURING 1 ACRE AND SY.NO.46/2 MEASURING 1 ACRE 20 GUNTAS SITUATED AT THIMMANAHALLI VILLAGE, NANDI HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK AND DISTRICT AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010093512019 NC: 2026:KHC:42114 WP No. 14103 of 2019 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 1957. He belonged to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe community. The grant was subject to a condition that the land should not be alienated for a period of 10 years from the date of grant. The land was sold in the year 1966. The Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (for short 'PTCL Act') came into force on 01.01.1979. Respondent nos.4 and 5 are the legal representatives of the original grantee. For the first time, an application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act challenging the sale was filed in the year 2006. Respondent no.3-Assistant Commissioner allowed the said application and ordered for resumption and restoration of the land in favour of the legal representatives of the original grantee. The appeal filed by one Munirathnamma against the said order of Assistant Commissioner has been dismissed by respondent no.2-Deputy - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010093512019 NC: 2026:KHC:42114 WP No. 14103 of 2019 Commissioner. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. 2. The case of the petitioners is that the application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act has been filed after an unreasonable delay of 40 years from the date of sale and about 27 years from the date on which the PTCL Act came into force and the said delay has not been satisfactorily explained. On the said ground, it is prayed that the writ petition be allowed. 3. Notice to respondent no.5 is held sufficient. Respondent nos.4, 6, 7, 8, 10 and 11 though served have remained unrepresented. 4. 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 is any inordinate and unreasonable delay in filing the application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act. 6. 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 - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010093512019 NC: 2026:KHC:42114 WP No. 14103 of 2019 v. State of Karnataka and Others in W.P.No.3597/2018, have held that an unreasonable delay in challenging the sale becomes fatal to an application filed under Section 5 of the PTCL Act. 7. Admittedly, the sale was effected in the year 1966. The application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act was filed only in the year 2006, after a lapse of 40 years from the date of sale and about 27 years from the date on which the PTCL Act came into force. The said delay has not been satisfactorily explained by respondent nos.4 and 5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the same has to be held as unreasonable. Respondent nos.2 and 3 have committed an error by passing the impugned orders. Accordingly, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside. 8. Hence, the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed; (ii) The impugned order dated 28.09.2012 bearing no.¦n¹J¯ï:(aPÀÌ)78/2006-07 passed by respondent - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010093512019 NC: 2026:KHC:42114 WP No. 14103 of 2019 no.3-Assistant Commissioner vide Annexure-C to the writ petition is hereby set aside; (iii) The impugned order dated 04.08.2014 bearing no.DgïJ/J¸ï¹J¸ïn/37/2012-13 passed by respondent no.2-Deputy Commissioner vide Annexure-D to the writ petition is hereby set aside; (iv) The application made under Section 5 of the PTCL Act by respondent nos.4 and 5 before respondent no.3 is hereby dismissed. SD/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32