D.V. SHYLENDRA KUMAR, J.—The only point that has been urged in this writ petition, a matter arising under the provisions of the Karnataka (Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act. 1978 (for short ‘the Act’) and directed against the order passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner exercising his appellate power under Section 5A of the Act is that the original grantee-one Erappa in whose favour Government land in an extend of 32 guntas in Sy. No. 17 of Gangonda-nahalli Village, Dasanapura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, had been granted with certain conditions is not a person belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe and, therefore, the Deputy Commissioner has committed an error in interfering with the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner who had declined to act under Section 5 of the Act at the instance of the original grantee.

2. Grant of this extent of land on 7.11.1978 in favour of Erappa and the subject, land having been sold by the said grantee on 12.1.1995 to one Nagaraj who in turn having sold the same in favour of the present writ petitioner-Gowramma as per another sale transaction dated 15.5.1997 are not in dispute. Erappa himself had petitioned before the Assistant Commissioner claiming that he should be extended the benefit of the provisions of Section 4 of the Act by holding an inquiry under Section 5 of the Act and for resumption of the land and restore it to him.

3. The inquiry was held by the Assistant Commissioner, writ petitioner had been put on notice and was heard.

4. On behalf of the writ petitioner, in the proceedings under Section 5 of the Act before the Assistant Commissioner, specific contention was taken to the effect that the caste certificate that had been produced on behalf of the grantee to the effect that person belonged to Scheduled Caste was a forged document; that it was totally false and incorrect; that the caste certificate in respect of one Gangabhadraiah cannot be of any avail to the applicant-grantee as the said person is a third person and, therefore, the application should be rejected and other grounds are also urged.

5. Ultimately, the Assistant Commissioner though discussed all these arguments both written and oral, filed on behalf of the applicant as well as by the respondents, recorded a finding to the effect that on the basis of the xerox copy of the caste certificate produced in respect of Gangabhadraiah. son of Erappa-grantee, it appeared that the grantee belonged to ‘nayaka’ community, but nevertheless, proceeded to reject the application holding that there was no merit in the application and, therefore, it is to be dismissed as per order dated 1.4.2008 (copy at Annexure H).

6. As against this order, the legal heir of the original grantee, namely. Smt. Puttasiddamma wife of Erappa. filed an appeal as by that time the applicant Erappa was no more and in the appeal under Section 5A of the Act, the Special Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore District, as per his order dated 19.4.2010 (copy at Annexure L) allowed the appeal, by setting aside the order of the Assistant Commissioner observing that the Assistant Commissioner had not bestowed proper attention to the legal position as well as the factual position and also noticing that the subject land had been acquired by the State for the benefit of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board for ‘BMIC Project’; that there was no question of resumption of the land from the possession of the purchaser, but recorded a finding that the grantee or his legal heirs are entitled to receive compensation in respect of the subject land.

7. It is questioning legality of this order at Annexure L and for quashing the same, the present writ petition by the last purchaser.

8. Appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner and as noticed in the earlier part of this order, Sri. N. Devhadass, learned senior counsel would urge that the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner is not at all a satisfactory order;