Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 41993 (KAR)

SMT BHEEMI BAI v. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

WP/24338/2025 · 2026-09-22

Jyoti M

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010522962025 NC: 2026:KHC:52260 WP No. 24338 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 24338 OF 2025 (SC/ST) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. BHEEMI BAI D/O SAKRA NAIKA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/O THARALAGHATTA GRAMA, SHIKARIPURA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 427. 2. SMT. DURGI BAI W/O DEEPLA NAIKA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O THARALAGHATTA GRAMA, SHIKARIPURA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT- 577 427. 3. SRI HALA NAIKA S/O SAKRA NAIKA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/O THARALAGHATTA GRAMA, SHIKARIPURA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT- 577 427. 4. SRI. SEVYA NAIKA S/O SAKRA NAIKA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O THARALAGHATTA GRAMA, SHIKARIPURA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT- 577 427. 5. SMT SEETHA BAI D/O SAKRA NAIKA Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010522962025 NC: 2026:KHC:52260 WP No. 24338 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/O BEGUR VADDAGERE, THANDA VILLAGE, SHIKARIPURA - 577 427. 6. SMT GOWRI BAI D/O SAKRA NAIKA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/O THARALAGHATTA GRAMA, SHIKARIPURA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 427. 7. SRI PARMESH NAIKA S/O SAKRA NAIKA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O BEGUR VADDAGERE, THANDA VILLAGE, SHIKARIPURA-577 427. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. LAKSHMI PATHI D.G., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. BALAGANGADHARA G.S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, SHIVAMOGGA-577 201. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER SAGARA CITY, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201. 3. THE THASILDAR GRADE-2 SHIKARIPURA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201. - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010522962025 NC: 2026:KHC:52260 WP No. 24338 of 2025 4. SRI NOOR AHMED S/O D. JAMALUDDIN SAB, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/O JAYANAGARA, SHIKARIPURA TOWN, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201. 5. SRI ABDUL GHANI S/O D. JAMALUDDIN SAB, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/O JAYANAGARA, SHIKARIPURA TOWN, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201. 6. SRI RIZWAN BASHA S/O D.JAMALUDDIN SAB, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/O JAYANAGARA, SHIKARIPURA TOWN, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. S. SIDDALINGAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR C/R4, R5 AND R6 - ABSENT) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010522962025 NC: 2026:KHC:52260 WP No. 24338 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Lakshmipathi.D.G., counsel on behalf of Sri.Balagangadhar.G.S., counsel for the petitioners; Smt.Savithramma, Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3, appeared in person. There is no representation on behalf of counsel for respondents 4, 5 and 6. 2. The petition is filed seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner. This order is challenged in this writ petition on several grounds as set out in the memorandum of the writ petition. 3. Counsel for the respective parties advanced several contentions. The Court heard the arguments and carefully perused the papers. 4. This issue is limited to resumption proceedings. The land in question, Sy.Nos.24/2, 24/5, 24/6 and 24/7, spans 5 - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010522962025 NC: 2026:KHC:52260 WP No. 24338 of 2025 acres 38 guntas. It was granted to Mr.Sakriyanaika in 1966. Later, the subject land was sold in 1984 and in 2009 through a registered sale deed. Nearly 38 years after the sale, in 2022, the resumption proceedings were initiated before the Assistant Commissioner. The Assistant Commissioner allowed the application and ordered for resumption and the Deputy Commissioner set aside the order the Assistant Commissioner on the grounds of laches. In my view, the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner is justified as there was an inordinate delay of 38 years in seeking resumption of the land. I find no grounds to interfere with the order of the Deputy Commissioner, the petition devoid of merit, it is rejected. On rejection of the Writ Petition, any interim order stands discharged, and any pending interlocutory applications, if any, are disposed of. Sd/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE SJK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 54