1. These writ petitions, though had been listed for passing orders on application in Misc W. No. 4150 of 2011 filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 for vacating the interim order of stay granted in these petitions and another application in Misc. W No. 6402 of 2011 filed on behalf of petitioners, has been heard on merits very extensively and while the application for amendment is formally ordered. the application for vacating stay need not be orderd separately, as writ petitions are being disposed of as under.

2. I have heard Sri. S.K.V. Chalapathy, learned senior advocate appearing for Sri. Sangamesh R. Bharsetty, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri. R. Omkumar, learned AGA for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri. S.P. Kulkarni, learned counsel for fourth respondent at some length and in some detail.

3. Writ petitions are basically directed against, the order dated 9-9-2020 (copy at Annexure - R to the writ Petition). passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Bangalore North Sub-division, Bangalore and the affirming order dated 17-3-2011, a copy of which was produced by the petitioners subsequent to the filing of the writ petitions along with a memo dated 12-4-2011, passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner - Bangalore Urban District, dismissing the appeal.

4. The subject orders of the Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner are passed under S.5 and S.5A respectively of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act. 1978 (for short, the PTCL Act) and the Assistant Commissioner passing the order at the instance of the fourth respondent, who had claimed that he is son of one Yallappa, who is in turn claimed to be a legal heir of Smt. Siddamma and Smt. Gundamma, both said to be wives of one Ramaiah and in whose favour two parcels of land, one measuring an extent of 1 acre 36 guntas and the other measuring 2 acres 37 guntas of land in Sy Nos. 77/1, 77/2 and 77/3 of Agrahara Dasarahalli, now at 3rd Block, IV Stage, West of Chord Road, Bangalore - 73, had been granted as per grant order dated 4-8-1962 evidenced by endorsement dated 16-9-1964, issued by the additional special Deputy Commissioner for inams abolition, as applicants, who had made their applications under S.5 of the Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954 (for short, abolition Act).

5. It appears even before these orders under S.5 of the Abolition Act being passed by the special Deputy Commissioner, under two sale deeds dated 28-6-1962, predecessor - in - title of the present writ petitioners by name G. Nanjusa, had acquired interest, in respect of the entire land covered under the two regrant orders dated 4-8-1962, one sale deed said to have been, executed by the grantee Smt. Gundamma and her husband Ramaiah, transferring an extent of 3 acres 11 guntas of land and another sale deed said to have been executed by one Papaiah, transferring interest in respect of 37‚½ guntas of land, and the said Papaiah. having in turn acquired interest in respect of this extent of land under an earlier sale transaction dated 17-7-1961, said to have been executed in his favour by Smt. Siddamma or Gundamma, one of the grantees.

6. It is the version of the petitioners that ever since they have been in possession and enjoyment of the subject property and according to learned counsel for the petitioners, the two sale deeds in fact conveyed a total extent of 4 acres 13 guntas of land, a few guntas in excess of the land as it measured even by adding up the extent of lands regranted in terms of the regrant orders dated 4-8-1962 passed in favour of Smt. Gundamma and Smt. Siddamma.

7. However, it appears, proceedings had been initiated before the Assistant Commissioner under S.5 of the PTCL Act at the instance of fourth respondent, who claimed to be a legal heir under the original grantees Smt. Gundamm and Smt. Siddamma, it is on such premise for invalidating the sale transactions in terms of S.4 of the PTCL Act and resu