1. Provisions of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (for short, ‘the Act’) while have brought misery, hardship, heartburn and what not to those purchasers who are caught within the mischief of Section 4 of the Act and consequential follow up action in terms of Section 5 of the Act, have nevertheless provided some exit routes to some of those chance purchasers who are not caught within the web of this violation of either under subsection (1) or sub-section (2) of Section 4 of the Act.

2. An examination of the transactions in respect of a granted land under the provisions of the Act is confined to two things. Firstly if the transaction was prior to the Act coming into force, as to whether the transaction was in violation of any of the conditions subject to which land had been granted and secondly if the transaction is subsequent to the Act coming into force, not merely such violation but whether it is accompanied by a prior permission accorded by the State Government in terms of under sub-section (2) of Section 4 of the Act. Therefore, it is clear that in respect of transactions which are prior to the Act coming into force, it is only examination on the touchstone of the applicability or otherwise of sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Act.

3. The present writ petitions are by a good number of persons who claims that they have derived their right, title or interest through as many sale deeds executed in their favour by ninth respondent, who, it appears, had derived right, title and interest in an extent of 2 acres of land in Sy.No.61 of T. Dasarahalli Village, Bangalore North Taluk under two sale transactions dated 28-9-1972 for an extent of one acre and the other transaction dated 27-11-1972 for the rest of the extent of subject land, which was subject-matter of grant dated 19-4-1930 made by the then revenue authorities, in favour of one Muniga son of Munikandara, a person belonging to depressed class community.

4. Petitioners claims that they are aggrieved by the order dated 20-5-2011, passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner, arrayed as second respondent to the writ petitions, who has reversed the earlier order dated 10-3-2008 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Bangalore north sub-division in proceedings No. K SC/ST 4/06-07, whereunder while the Assistant Commissioner had rejected an application filed under Section 5 of the Act by the respondents 4 to 8 herein. The Special Deputy Commissioner exercising his appellate power at the instance of the applicants, had reversed the order and held that the two sale transactions of the year 1972 and all subsequent transactions are voided, for two reasons viz., that the transactions are in violation of the terms of grant i.e., one for prohibition for alienation permanently and secondly for not obtaining prior permission of the State Government before transferring the subject land by the grantee and his children.

5. It is this order of the Deputy Commissioner, which is questioned in these writ petitions by persons claiming to be in possession and who have constructed some dwelling units having purchased small bits and pieces of the subject land from ninth respondent vide various sale transactions and who claim that the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner is not in consonance with the statutory provisions, but clearly in contravention and at variance with the same etc.

6. Petitions had been admitted by issue of rule and the respondents are served. While State and the statutory authorities are represented by Sri R Omkumar, learned AGA, Sri N. Devhadas, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for Sri Y. Hariprasad for respondents 4 to 8 and the petitioners are represented by Sri Padmanabha Mahale, learned Senior Advocate for M/s. Jayaraj and Associates.

7. Heard the submissions of all Counsel appearing for the parties for disposal.

8. Submission of Sri Padmanabha Mahale, learned Senior Advocate for the p