In this appeal, the appellant calls in question the order dated 27-52003 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the W.P. No. 12622 of 2003 filed by him challenging the order passed by respondents 2 and 3 resuming the land in favour of the legal representatives of the original grantee.

2. The facts of the case in brief:

An extent of 2 acres of land in Sy. No. 42, Block No. 47 situated at Mallathhalli Village, Yeshwanthpura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk granted in favour of one late Jutta Bhovi on 10-2-1953. The Saguvali Chit was issued on 1-5-1953 under the Darkasth Rule. As per the amended Rule 43(8) of the Karnataka Land Grant Rules, 1969, then existing in the year 1953, the non-alienation condition was for a period of 20 years. However, the said granted land was sold by the wife and children of late Jutta Bhovi on 22-6-1964 in favour of one Sitharamu alias Venkataswamy for a valuable sale consideration. Subsequently, the said Sitharam alias Venkataswamy sold the said lands in favour of one L.M. Madaiah on 22-7-1964 for a valuable sale consideration. It is stated that ever since the sale, L.M. Madaiah, after his death his son who is the appellant herein is enjoying the said land.

3. After coming into force the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), an application was presented by the son of Jutta Bhovi seeking for resumption of the land in his favour contending that the sale is in violation of Sections 4 and 5 of the Act and also sought for restoration of the land in his favour. Pursuant to the application made by the son of the original grantee, the Assistant Commissioner by his order dated 29-8-1997 declared that the sale of granted lands in favour of L.M. Madaiah is in violation of Sections 4 and 5 of the Act and ordered for resumption of the lands in favour of the original grantee. Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellant herein filed an appeal under section 5-A of the Act before the Deputy Commissioner contending that the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner is contrary to law.

4. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant before the Deputy Commissioner that while granting the land, the condition imposed for non-alienation is for a period of 10 years and the alienation has been made after 11 years and therefore it will not amount to violation of Sections 4 and 5 of the Act. The learned Counsel also contended that the Act is not applicable to the granted lands. The Deputy Commissioner after considering the contention raised by the appellant by its order dated 1-7-2002 was pleased to dismiss the appeal upholding the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner as well as Deputy Commissioner, the appellant filed W.P. No. 12622 of 2003 challenging the same on various grounds and also contended that in view of the amendment to Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, Incorporating Section 29-A of the Karnataka Land Grant Rules, the condition imposed in the grant certificate regarding non-alienation would not come in the way of transfer effected on and from 17-10-1974. It is further contended that the first sale was made to a person belonging to the Scheduled Caste. Hence, the sale is not violative of provisions of Sections 4 and 5 of the Act.

5. The learned Single Judge after considering the entire materials on record and also the judgments relied upon by the appellant herein dismissed the writ petition holding that the finding recorded by the authorities below is purely a question of fact and the same is not liable to be interfered with, by this Court. The appellant being aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Single Judge filed the present writ appeal.

6. Sri M.S. Rajendra Prasad, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant contended that in the absence of original record, the learned Single Judge ought not to hav