( 1 ) SINCE in all these writ petitions the orders impugned are the same and common questions of law and facts are involved, all of them are heard together and disposed of by this common order.

( 2 ) THE admitted facts in all these writ petitions are as follows: the land bearing Survey No. 1 measuring in all 3 Acres situate in jarakabande Kaval, Bangalore North Taluk was granted to one Venkata bovi under a grant certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Bangalore North taluk vide No. D. D. 3/56-57 dated 1-6-1957. On 1-6-1967 the said venkata Bovi sold 1 Acre 20 Guntas of land out of 3 Acres to one V. R. Gnanaprakasham and another 1 Acre 20 Guntas to one V. R. Anthoniswamy. On coming into force of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act ('the act' for short) one V. Venkataswamy, S/o the grantee Venkata Bovi made an application before the Assistant Commissioner, Bangalore sub-Division, Bangalore under Rule 3 (2) of the Act for restoration of possession. He had impleaded V. R. Gnanaprakasham and V. R. Anthoniswamy, the purchasers of the property from his father and one Gurusiddappa- petitioner in W. P. No. 17119 of 1990 and Marakka-petitioner in W. P. No. 17120 of 1990 as respondents.

( 3 ) THE application was enquired into by the Assistant Commissioner in accordance with law after notifying the respondents therein. The respondents before the Assistant Commissioner contended inter alia that the grantee Venkata Bovi did not belong to Scheduled Tribe that one of the respondents Marakka had perfected her title by adverse possession. That during the relevant time when the land was granted that is on 1-6-1957 the land was subject to the rules under the Land Revenue code and under Rule 43 (6) (a) (ii) the prescribed period of non-alienation was 10 years from the date of the grant and the grant being made on 1-6-1957 the sale having taken place on 1-6-1967 it was beyond the period of 10 years. Therefore, the sale was valid.

( 4 ) THE Assistant Commissioner rejected all the contentions.

( 5 ) IN sofar as the first objection that Venkata Bovi was not a member of Scheduled Tribe is concerned, the Assistant Commissioner has held that the same was not tenable in view of non-production of any material by the objectors in support of their contentions. Insofar as the contention that the sale made by Venkata Bovi was beyond 10 years, the Assistant commissioner relying on Section 12 (1) of the Limitation Act read with section 9 (4) of the General Clauses Act has held that the date of the grant that is 1-6-1957 has to be excluded and the period for computing the 10 years would start from 2-6-1957 and therefore the sale was within the prohibited period. He therefore declared the sale made by venkata Bovi as void and ordered restoration of possession.

( 6 ) AGGRIEVED by the order of the Assistant Commissioner all the respondents except one K. N. Sreenivasaiah individually preferred appeals before the Special Deputy Commissioner, Rural Bangalore in SC. ST. Appeal Nos. 6, 7 and 9 of 1989-90. The Deputy Commissioner by a considered order dated 27-7-1990 dismissed the appeals. Aggrieved by the orders of the Deputy Commissioner the above three writ petitions are filed.

( 7 ) DURING the pendency of the writ petitions the applicant before the assistant Commissioner Venkataswamy died on 2-12-1990 and his legal representatives were brought on record and are represented.

( 8 ) WRIT Petition No. 17082 of 1990 is filed by V. R. Gnanaprakasham who had purchased 1 Acre 20 Guntas of land from Venkata Bovi under a registered sale deed dated 1-6-1967.

( 9 ) WRIT Petition No. 17119 of 1990 is filed by G. S. Gurusiddappa, respondent before the Assistant Commissioner. The contention of the petitioner in this petition is Gnanaprakash had sold the land which he had purchased in favour of a society and the same has been challenged. He has purchased the land from the society and he is in possessio