IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 30863 OF 2025 (LR)

BETWEEN:

THE JYOTHI SEVA SOCIETY OF BANGALORE (SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOCIETES REGISTRATION ACT)

JYOTHI SADAN, BOX NO.3417, 3^RD BOCK, 8^TH MAIN, KORAMANGALA P.O., BANGALORE - 560 034, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SABASTIN GERGE.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANANDEESWAR D.R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY, Digitally signed by VIDYA G R REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, Location: HIGH DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE - 560 001.

COURT OF KARNATAKA

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MYSORE DISTRICT, MYSORE - 570 001.

3. THE TAHSILDAR, MYSORE TALUK, MYSORE - 570 001.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. SESHU, HCGP)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 19/8/2025 PASSED BY THE 2^ND RESPONDENT IN CASE NO LRF.01/2025, AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has sought for issuance of writ of certiorari to set aside the impugned order at Annexure-A. Annexure-A is the proceedings of the Deputy Commissioner, whereby the Deputy Commissioner has ordered that the katha of the land would continue in the name of the 'Government' and has directed the Tahsildar to take appropriate action. It is such order of the Deputy Commissioner that has been called in question by the petitioner.

2. The petitioner is a 'Trust' and submit that they had obtained permission for purchase of agricultural land and to utilise it for educational purposes after obtaining permission from the Government. It is further submitted that the work was not completed within 2 years and at such time, action was initiated by the respondent where the respondent authorities revoking permission granted for purchase of agricultural land and forfeiting the same to the Government. The said action came to be challenged in W.P.Nos.11922/2011 and 9644/2011, which came to be disposed of on 12.12.2011.

3. This Court had set aside the order of cancellation while noticing that under Section 109 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act (for short 'the Act'), the State Authorities could extend the time for completion of building, and to put the property to use for other than agricultural purpose. Further, the Court has noticed specifically the requirement of holding an enquiry as contemplated under Section 109(2) of the Act. Having noticed so, the writ petition was disposed of with the following order:

"(a) Both the Petitions stand allowed.

(b) The impugned order in both the writ petitions stand quashed.

(c) It is open for the competent authority to initiate proceedings afresh after issuing a notice.

(d) Liberty is reserved accordingly.

(e) It is also open for the petitioner to seek extension of time indicating the exigencies and also reason as to why they were not able to complete the project within the stipulated period."

4. It is submitted that thereafter the petitioner has made a request to the respondent authorities and acting on such representation, after making a spot inspection, the Deputy Commissioner has made appropriate recommendation to the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department at Annexure-F by way of report on

28.06.2013.

5. A perusal of the said report would reveal that construction of the building for educational purpose is completed and there are benches, desks and arrangements made for stay of the teaching staff. Further, it is recommended by the Deputy Commissioner that as the proposed use of land is for educational purposes relating to poor children, it would be appropriate to consider extension of time for use of land for educational purposes. Though such report of the Deputy Commissioner is made on 28.06.2013, till date no action has been taken.

6. Meanwhile, it is notice