- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010508472025 NC: 2026:KHC:47428 WP No. 23449 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 23449 OF 2025 (SC/ST) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI R S CHANDRASHEKARAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O. LATE SIDDAGANGAPPA. 2. SMT. KAVITHA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, W/O. R.S. CHANDRASHEKAR. 3. SHRI. R.S. KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, S/O. LATE SIDDAGANGAPPA. 4. SHRI. SHREYAS, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, S/O. R.S. KUMAR. 5. KUM. SRUSHTI, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, D/O. R.S. KUMAR. 6. SHRI. R.S. SHIVAKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, S/O. LATE SIDDAGANGAPPA. Digitally signed by K M SOMASHEKAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010508472025 NC: 2026:KHC:47428 WP No. 23449 of 2025 7. SMT. NANDA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, W/O. R.S. SHIVAKUMAR. ALL ARE R/O. AJJIHALLI VILLAGE, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577213. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. CHIDAMBARA G S.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT, DAVANAGERE-577001. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, HONNALI SUB-DIVISION, HONNALI DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577217. 4. SHRI. T.V. SRIRANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, S/O. LATE A.V. THIMMAPPA, R/O. AJJIHALLI VILLAGE, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577213. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.SAVITHRAMMA., AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI.M.R.HIREMATHAD., ADVOCATE FOR R4-ABSENT) - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010508472025 NC: 2026:KHC:47428 WP No. 23449 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO- QUASH THE ORDER DATED 25.07.2025 PASSED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT IN CASE NO. PTCL/24/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE -A AND ALSO THE ORDER DATED 09.01.2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN CASE NO. PTCL/CR/08/2024-25 VIDE ANNEXURE-B 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 ORAL ORDER The land which is the subject matter of the writ petition was granted in favour of the original grantee in the year 1946 on lease basis. The same was converted as freehold in the year 1955. Thereafter, there was a partition in the family of the original grantee and the land which is the subject matter of the writ petition came to be share of respondent No.4. He has sold the land in favour of the petitioners in the year 2001 by way of three sale - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010508472025 NC: 2026:KHC:47428 WP No. 23449 of 2025 deeds. He initiated the proceedings 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 2016 after a delay of 15 years. Respondent No.3 - the Assistant Commissioner has dismissed the said application. However, respondent No.2 - the Deputy Commissioner remanded the matter back to respondent No.3 - the Assistant Commissioner. On the second occasion, respondent No.3 - the Assistant Commissioner has allowed the application filed under Section 5 of the PTCL Act. On an appeal, respondent No.2 - the Deputy Commissioner has confirmed the same. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. 2. The case of the petitioner is that there has been an inordinate delay of 15 years in respondent No.4 making the necessary application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act, since the date of the petitioners purchasing the property. This according to the petitioners is an unreasonable delay and the application filed under Section 5 of the PTCL Act - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010508472025 NC: 2026:KHC:47428 WP No. 23449 of 2025 ought not to have been entertained by the authorities concerned. 3. The learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 is absent. 4. The learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 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 inordinate delay on the part of respondent No.4 in making an application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act. 6. Admittedly, the land was sold in the year 2001 and the application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act is made only in the year 2016. There has been a delay of around 15 years, which is not satisfactorily explained by respondent No.4. Under the circumstances, the same has to be considered as unreasonable. - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010508472025 NC: 2026:KHC:47428 WP No. 23449 of 2025 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 to the case of the original grantee / his legal heirs. 8. Hence, the following: ORDER i. The Writ Petition is hereby allowed. ii. The impugned order dated 09.01.2025 bearing Case No.P.T.C.L/CR/08/2024-25 passed by respondent No.3 - the Assistant Commissioner vide Annexure - B to the writ petition is hereby set aside. - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010508472025 NC: 2026:KHC:47428 WP No. 23449 of 2025 iii. The impugned order dated 24.07.2025 bearing Case No.PTCL/24/2025 passed by respondent No.2 - the Deputy Commissioner vide Annexure - A to the writ petition is hereby set aside. iv. The application filed by respondent No.4 before respondent No.3 - the Assistant Commissioner under Section 5 of the PTCL Act is hereby dismissed. v. The revenue entries / possession of the property, shall be restored in favour of the petitioners by the concerned authorities. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE CH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39