Karnataka High Court
Smt. Anjinamma N vs State Of Karnataka on 23 January, 2026
Author: R Devdas
Bench: R Devdas
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:4061
WP No. 32011 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS
WRIT PETITION NO. 32011 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. ANJINAMMA N
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
W/O LATE HANUMAIAH,
2. SRI. KRISHNAMURTHY H
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
S/O LATE HANUMAIAH,
3. SMT. BRUNDA H
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
W/O SRI. KRISHNAMURTHY H,
ALL ARE RESIDING AT AVALAHALLI VILLAGE,
YELAHANKA HOBLI, YELAHANKA,
Digitally signed BANGALORE - 560 064.
by
SHARADAVANI ...PETITIONERS
B
Location: High
Court of (BY SMT. VASANTHA LAKSHMI H.V, ADVOCATE)
Karnataka
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:4061
WP No. 32011 of 2025
HC-KAR
BANGALORE DISTRICT, BANGALORE - 560 009.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
BANGALORE NORTH SUB-DIVISION,
BANGALORE - 560 009.
4. THE TAHSILDAR
YELAHANKA TALUK,
BANGALORE - 560 064.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR, AGA)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
RECORDSISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER
APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OF DIRECTION TO QUASH THE
ORDER NO.RRT/2NA/CR/756/08-09, DATED 10.01.2025,
PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT THE SPECIAL DEPUTY
COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU DISTRICT, FURNISHED AT
ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS
ORAL ORDER
Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice of all the respondents.
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:4061 WP No. 32011 of 2025 HC-KAR
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that earlier, when one of the legal heirs of the original grantee, Sri.Sanjivaiah, filed an application before the Assistant Commissioner, Bangalore North Sub-Division, in proceedings bearing No.K.SC.ST.No.51/2015-16 against the purchaser of the land, contending that the transfer was hit by the provisions of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 ( for short, 'PTCL Act'), the Assistant Commissioner passed an order on 25.08.2016 holding that the lands granted to Sri.Sanjivaiah in the year 1981 were transferred in violation of the provisions of sub-Section 4(2) of the PTCL Act, without obtaining prior permission of the Government. Accordingly, the application was allowed and the sale transactions were held void and accordingly, directions were issued to resume and restore the lands in favour of the original grantee or his legal heirs. However, since the mutation entries were not made in favour of the legal heirs of the original grantee, the petitioners have given a representation at Annexure-H dated 04.02.2025 to enter their names in the revenue records. -4-
NC: 2026:KHC:4061 WP No. 32011 of 2025 HC-KAR
3. At this stage, an endorsement was issued at Annexure-J dated 25.04.2025 stating that the lands in question are gomal lands and therefore, the name of the petitioner cannot be mutated in the revenue records. Further, at the behest of the Tahsildar of Yelahanka Taluk, the Special Deputy Commissioner appears to have taken up proceedings suo motu under Section 136(3) read with Section 67(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, and the Deputy Commissioner, without even issuing notice to the petitioners has proceeded to render a finding that in terms of the report of the Tahsildar, it is clear that the lands in question are gomal lands and there is no valid grant made in favour of any person. However, it is found that the name of Smt.Mulibai Nan vani, who was in fact the subsequent purchaser, was entered in the revenue records in terms of M.R.No.45/2003-2004. The Deputy Commissioner has proceeded to direct the Tahsildar to resume the said land measuring 2 acres in Survey No.79/80-P2 situated at Avalahalli Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore North (Additional) Taluk, now Yelahanka Taluk, to the government free from all encumbrances by evicting those who are in occupation for possession of the same in accordance with law. -5-
NC: 2026:KHC:4061 WP No. 32011 of 2025 HC-KAR
4. Learned counsel submits that such an order could not have been passed without issuing notice to the petitioners. Moreover, when a finding is already recorded by the Assistant Commissioner in the proceedings under the PTCL Act that late Sri.Sanjivaiah was granted the lands in violation of the provisions contained in Section 4(2) of the PTCL Act, which requires prior permission of the government for the purchaser to purchase the property, it is not open for the respondents now to say that there was no grant made in favour of Sri Sanjivaiah, these are contrary statements.
5. There is substance in the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. The respondent authorities cannot blow hot and cold. It is the finding of the Assistant Commissioner in a duly constituted proceeding under Section 5 of the PTCL Act, that Sri. Sanjivaiah was granted 2 acres of land, waiving the upset price as per government notification No.RD 11 LGP 76 dated 08.09.1980. Mutation entries were also carried out accordingly in favour of Sri.Sanjivaiah in M.R.No.26/1981-1982. Such being the case, the respondent authorities, namely the Tahsildar and the Deputy -6- NC: 2026:KHC:4061 WP No. 32011 of 2025 HC-KAR Commissioner, have fallen into grave error in initiating proceedings, and that too without issuing notice to the legal heirs of late Sri.Sanjivaiah. The respondent shown in the impugned order is Smt.Mulibai Nan vani, who is the purchaser and not the original grantee or his legal heirs.
6. For the reasons stated above, this Court is of the considered opinion that initiation of proceedings by the Special Deputy Commissioner invoking Section 136(3) is illegal and unsustainable. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order at Annexure-A dated 10.01.2025 passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner-3, Bengaluru North Sub- Division in proceedings bearing No.RRT(2)(NA)CR/756/2008-09 are hereby quashed and set aside. The respondent-Tahsildar, Yelahanka Taluk, is hereby directed to proceed to find out who are the legal heirs of the original grantee Sri.Sanjivaiah and restore their names in the revenue records. The same shall be complied with as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
-7-
NC: 2026:KHC:4061 WP No. 32011 of 2025 HC-KAR Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today.
Sd/-
(R DEVDAS) JUDGE rv List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22