The main legal point established in the judgment is the abuse of process of law, malafides, and highhandedness in the resumption and restoration of land, leading to the demolition of structures, and the justification of exercising extraordinary jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

JUDGMENT :

1. The captioned appeals are filed questioning the common order dtd. 15/3/2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No. 9723/2020 c/w W.P.Nos.5008/2020 and 915/2020. W.A.No. 453/2021 is filed by the grantee, W.A.No. 394/2021 is filed by the State, W.A.No. 397/2021 is filed by the Tahsildar and W.A.No. 444/2021 is filed by the Assistant Commissioner.

2. The subject matter of the appeal is agricultural land bearing Sy.No. 152/1 measuring 2 acres 31 guntas situated in Doddathoguru Village, Beguru Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk. The said land was granted to one Kaveriga and after his death his legal heirs inherited the granted land. The legal heirs sold the land in question under registered sale deed dtd. 9/4/2001 in favour of one Karar Ahmed. The transferee got the land converted from agricultural to non-agricultural purpose on 21/9/2001. The said Karar Ahmed sold 1 acre 30 guntas out of total extent measuring 2 acres 31 guntas in favour of one K.Boopathy on 27/7/2002. The remaining portion was sold in favour of M/s.Pathy Housing Private Limited represented by K.Boopathy on 21/5/2003. The said K.Boopathy applied for sanction of layout in respect of 1 acre 30 guntas and thereafter formed residential sites in the layout and sold 12 sites in favour of K.C.Varghese. These 12 sites measuring 14,880 sq.ft. were sold by K.C.Varghese in favour of M/s. Unidesign Builders and Developers Private limited who was petitioner in W.P.Nos.915/2020 and 5008/2020 and petitioner No. 4 in W.P.No. 9723/2020.

3. Shri Muniraju, appellant in W.A.No. 453/2021 who is the legal heir of the original grantee having sold the lands along with other legal heirs in favour of one Karar Ahmed questioned the mutation by filing a Revision Petition before Deputy Commissioner challenging the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner who had directed to enter the name of the applicant as well as K.Boopathy who had acquired valid right and title under registered sale deed. The Deputy Commissioner allowed the revision and set aside the order of Assistant Commissioner which was questioned before this Court in W.P.No. 56193/2017. This Court allowed the writ petition by order dtd. 3/4/2019 and set aside the order of the Deputy Commissioner with a specific direction to delete the name of Shri Muniraju i.e., appellant in W.A.No. 453/2021. The said order was questioned by the present appellant in writ appeal which was also dismissed on 18/12/2019.

4. The present appellant having suffered an order at the hands of this Court approached the National Commission for Scheduled Castes, New Delhi. The National Commission recommended the Government to ensure resumption and restoration of the granted land comprised in Sy.No. 152/6 (earlier part of Sy.No. 152/1). The present appellant by creating a fresh cause of action on the basis of the recommendation by the National Commission, got initiated proceedings under the provisions of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (for short 'the PTCL Act'). The present appellant in W.A.No. 453/2021, however, for reasons best known to him did not implead M/s. Unidesign Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd., which had acquired valid and right and title, though M/s. Unidesign Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd., was a party before the National Commission.

5. The respondent No. 3-Assistant Commissioner takes up an enquiry and passes an order under Sec. 4(2) of the PTCL Act ordering for resumption and restoration of the land in favour of legal heirs of the grantee. The said order is passed by respondent No. 3-Assistant Commissioner on 18/2/2020 and on 26/2/2020 the building belonging to the respondents/transferees were demolished. The subsequent purchasers assailing the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner ordering for resumption approached the learned Single Judge by filing writ petitions. The learned Single Judge has dealt with the matter exhaustively and has recorded a categor