- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010647122025 NC: 2026:KHC:51442 WP No. 30269 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 30269 OF 2025 (SC/ST) BETWEEN: SRI. C MAHALINGAIAH S/O LATE CHINNAPPA AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS. R/AT UPPARAHALLI VILLAGE HANDANAKERE CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 214. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. SARASWATHI M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TUMAKURU DISTRICT TUMAKURU - 572 101. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TIPTUR SUB DIVISION TIPTUR-572 103. 3. SMT. CHIKKAMMA W/O LATE HANUMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, UPPARAHALLI BARAGURU POST, HANDANAKERE HOBLI, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK VTC UPPARAHALLI PO : BARAGUR Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010647122025 NC: 2026:KHC:51442 WP No. 30269 of 2025 SUB DISTRICT : CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TUMAKURU - 572 119. 4. SRI CHIKKANNA S/O LATE HANUMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, GHATAKINAKERE, KHALKURKE TUMKUR-572 201. 5. SRI CHANNAPPA S/O LATE HANUMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, GHATAKINAKERE KHALKURKE, TUMAKURU-572 201. 6. SRI RAJAPPA S/O HANUMAIAH AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS A K COLONY, NEAR TEMPLE VTC UPPARAHALLI, PO: BARAGUR TUMAKURU-572 119. 7. SMT NINGAMMA W/O KENCHAPPA D/O LATE HANUMAIAH AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, LAKSHMIPURA, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK, HANDANAKERE HOBLI TUMAKURU-572 119. 8. SMT CHANNAMMA W/O PARAMESHWARAIAH AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT AALURU BHAIRANAYAKANAHALLI POST HONNAVALLI HOBLI TIPTUR TALUK KOTANAYAKANAHALLI TUMKUR-572 201. - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010647122025 NC: 2026:KHC:51442 WP No. 30269 of 2025 9. SRI A.R. MANJUNATHA S/O LATE RANGAIAH AND PREM AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/A NO.ALURU VILLAGE BHAIRANAYAKANAHALLI POST HONNAVALLI HOBLI KOTANAYAKANAHALLI TUMAKURU-572 201. 10. SMT CHIKKAMMA W/O CHANNAPPA D/O LATE PREMA R/A NO.GHATIKINAKERE VILLAGE HARLAKUNIKE, TIPTUR TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA, AGA FOR R1 AND R2; SRI. M.D.KRISHNAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R10 - ABSENT) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Smt.Saraswathi.M., counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Savithramma., Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2 appeared in person. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010647122025 NC: 2026:KHC:51442 WP No. 30269 of 2025 There is no representation on behalf of counsel for respondents 3 to 10. 2. The petition is filed seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner. These orders are 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. AGA submits that as there was a violation of provisions of PTCL Act, the resumption is justified. Urging additional grounds, she submit that the petition lacks merit and the same may be dismissed. 4. The Court heard the arguments and carefully perused the papers. 5. This issue is limited to resumption proceedings. The land in question, Sy.No.56, spans 4 acres 31 guntas in Upparahalli Village, Handanakere Hobli, Chikkanayakanahalli - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010647122025 NC: 2026:KHC:51442 WP No. 30269 of 2025 Taluk. It was granted to Mr.Hanumaiah, in 1963. Later, the original grantee sold the property to the petitioner's father on 09.07.1974 through a registered sale deed. Nearly 35 years after the sale, in 2009, the original grantee initiated proceedings under Section 5 of the Act before the Assistant Commissioner, seeking resumption of the land. The Assistant Commissioner approved the petition and ordered the land to be resumed. Dissatisfied, the petitioner appealed to the Deputy Commissioner, who allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the Assistant Commissioner. Against which a writ petition was preferred before this Court in W.P.No.14687/2022 and this Court remanded the matter to the Deputy Commissioner. After remand, the Deputy Commissioner upheld the original order. However, both the Assistant and Deputy Commissioners overlooked the nearly 35-year delay in initiating these proceedings. They failed to consider the issue of laches or the petitioner's claim that the proceedings were commenced after an unreasonable delay. The authorities should have evaluated whether to proceed after nearly 35 years, especially since the rights in the land - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010647122025 NC: 2026:KHC:51442 WP No. 30269 of 2025 were settled by the sale deed in 1974. The oversight in considering the delay and laches led to orders for land resumption being issued without adequately addressing a crucial and relevant issue. The Division Bench in W.A.No.1035/2025 clarified that laches should be regarded as the primary requirement when resuming lands. It also held that if restoration action is filed after a significant delay, it could be barred by laches. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner and confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner, directing resumption of the subject land, cannot be legally sustained. Accordingly, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside. 6. For the foregoing reasons, the orders of the Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner are liable to be set aside. 7. The writ of certiorari is ordered. The order dated 08.12.2014 passed by the Assistant Commissioner vide - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010647122025 NC: 2026:KHC:51442 WP No. 30269 of 2025 Annexure-E, and the order dated 04.12.2024 passed by the Deputy Commissioner vide Annexure-H are quashed. As this Court has quashed the orders, the authority concerned is hereby directed to restore the petitioner's name in the subject land in the revenue records. 8. Resultantly, the writ petition is allowed. On disposal of the Writ Petition, any interim order stands discharged, and any pending interlocutory applications, if any, are disposed of. Sd/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24