- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1150 WP No. 111544 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.111544 OF 2017 (SCST) BETWEEN: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER, HAVERI DISTRICT, HAVERI. 2. TAHASILDAR HIREKERUR TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT. 3. SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER HIREKERURU TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT. 4. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF VETERINARY SCIENCES, HIREKERURU TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ASHOK T.KATTIMANI, AGA) AND: 1. SRI. CHANDRAPPA FAKIRAPPA KALERA AGE: MAJOR, OCC: NIL, KUDAPALI, MANJANNA E Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2026.02.03 10:49:16 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1150 WP No. 111544 of 2017 HIREKERUR TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT. 2. SRI. VEER MAHESHWARA VIDYA VARDHAK SANGHA, KUDAPAL, HIREKERUR TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. THE KARNATAKA STATE SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBES COMMISSION, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. P.G.NAIK AND SRI. G.B.NAIK, ADVOCATES FOR R1; SRI. K.CHANDRAMOHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R3; NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT ORDER, OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI THEREBY QUASHING THE IMPUGNED REPORT/DIRECTIONS DATED 19.08.2016 ISSUED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULE TRIBES COMMISSION, BENGALURU IN CASE NO.265/2015 (LAND) PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE- M IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1150 WP No. 111544 of 2017 ORAL ORDER The petitioners-State has called in question the report/ directions dated 19.08.2016 passed in No.265/2015 (Annexure-M), by the Karnataka State Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Commission, Bengaluru (“the Commission” for short), whereby the Commission has directed restoration of the subject lands in favour of respondent No.1 and has further issued consequential directions to the revenue authorities to take steps to deliver possession and to submit a compliance report. Brief facts: 2. The lands in question are situated in Kudupali Village, Hirekerur taluk, Haveri District and are stated to be inam lands, which stood vested in the state under the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961 (“the Act 1961” for short) and thereafter were re-granted. It is stated that over several decades, portions of the lands have been transferred under registered instruments and presently - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1150 WP No. 111544 of 2017 used for public purposes such as Educational Institutions, Hostels, Health Centres and Burial Grounds. Respondent No.1 approached the Commission in year 2013, alleging alienation. Pursuant to which the impugned report/direction came to be issued. 3. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the petitioners inviting the attention of this Court to Section 8 of the Karnataka State Commission for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes Act, 2002 (“the Act 2002” for short), submits that the Commission has only investigated and recommendatory powers and no adjudicatory jurisdiction to decide the title, declare alienations illegal or direct restoration of lands. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the impugned report, virtually adjudicates a civil rights, anulles transactions and directs restoration of possession, which amounts to exercising the power which is beyond the statutory mandate of commission and which is within the exclusive domain of the civil Courts or the competent - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1150 WP No. 111544 of 2017 statutory authorities under law. It is his contention that if at all respondent No.1 had any grievance, the remedy lay before the competent statutory authority under the relevant land laws or before the Civil Court and not before the Commission. On this ground, he sought to submit that the impugned order is ultra vires, arbitrary and liable to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 seeks to justify the impugned report/directions, contending that the commission is empowered to enquire the complaints relating to the deprivation of the rights of persons belonging to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes. She further contends that the lands belonged to the family of respondent No.1 and were alienated in violation of the protective provisions meant under the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (‘PTCL Act’ for short). It is submitted that the Commission having found that there was - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1150 WP No. 111544 of 2017 violation, which was justified in issuing directions to safeguard the rights of respondent No.1. 5. This Court has carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. 6. Section 8 of Chapter III of the Act 2002, prescribes the function and powers of the Commission, which reads as under: “8. Functions of the Commission.- The functions of the commission shall be as follows,- (a) to investigate and examine the working of various safeguards provided in the constitution of India or under any other law for the time being in force or under any order of the Government for the welfare and protection of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes of Karnataka and; (b) to inquire into specific complaints with respect to the deprivation of rights and safeguard of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes of Karnataka and to take up such matter with the appropriate authorities; - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1150 WP No. 111544 of 2017 © to participate and advise on the planning process of socio economic development of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes and to evaluate the progress of their development in the State. (d) to make recommendations as to the measures that should be taken by the State for the effective implementation of safeguards and other measures for the protection, welfare and socio economic development of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes and to make report to the State Government annually and at such other time as the Commission may deems fit. (e) to discharge such other functions in relation to the protection, welfare, development and advancement of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes as may be prescribed: Provided that if any matter specified in this section is dealt with by the National commission for Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes established under Article 338 of the Constitution of India the State Commission for Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes shall cease to have jurisdiction on such matter. (Emphasis supplied) - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1150 WP No. 111544 of 2017 7. A careful reading of the above section clearly indicates that it limits the functions of the Commission to investigate, inquiry, participation, advice and making recommendation to the State Government. The provision does not confer any adjudicatory power to decide inter-se civil disputes, adjudicate title, annul registered documents or direct restoration of possession. 8. A careful reading of the impugned report in demonstrates that the Commission has not confined itself to making investigation and recommendation, but has issued mandatory direction to restore the land and to take steps for delivery of possession, such directions squarely fall beyond the scope of Section 8 of the Act 2002 and therefore without jurisdiction. 9. If respondent No.1 claims that alienations are illegal, the proper course would have been to invoke remedies before the competent statutory authorities or approach the Civil Court. The Commission could not have - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1150 WP No. 111544 of 2017 substituted itself for statutory authorities or civil courts vested with such jurisdiction. 10. Viewed from any angle, the impugned report dated 19.08.2016 suffers from inherent lack of jurisdiction and is liable to be interfered with by this Court. Accordingly, this Court pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. ii. The directions dated 19.08.2016 passed in Case No.265/2015(Land) by the Commission are hereby quashed. iii. It is made clear that the Commission's report, if any, shall be treated as only a recommendation and shall not be acted upon to dispossess any person or disturb existing persons. iv. Liberty is reserved to respondent No.1 to avail appropriate remedy before the competent authority or before the Civil Court in accordance with law. If the respondent No.1 approaches the - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1150 WP No. 111544 of 2017 appropriate authority or civil court, the same shall be considered independently. v. It is also clarified that the revenue authority shall not act upon the impugned report or any future action. vi. Future action, if any, shall be strictly in accordance with the statutory provision and after due process of law. Sd/- JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA EM Ct:VH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47