IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT APPEAL NO. 799 OF 2024 (SC-ST)

BETWEEN:

1. VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

2. RAMESH AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS BOTH SONS OF LATE KRISHNA RESIDING AT NO.615/16, 7^TH CROSS LAKSHMINARAYANA TEMPLE ROAD MUNNENAKOLALA POST BANGALORE - 560 037.

…APPELLANTS Digitally (BY SRI CHAITANYA HEGADE, ADVOCATE)

signed by SRIDEVI S AND:

Location:

High Court

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA of Karnataka BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE - 560 001.

2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DISTRICT BANGALORE.

3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BANGALORE SUB-DIVISION BANGALORE.

4. M. B. SHANKAR REDDY S/O. LATE M. BHOOMI REDDY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT NO. 3276, HAL II STAGE INDIRANAGAR BANGALORE - 560 038.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH, AGA FOR R-1 TO 3 &

SRI P.B. RAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R-4)

THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 21/07/2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P. NO.11112/2021 AND MAY ALLOW THE SAID WRIT PETITION.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

1. The appellants have filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 21.07.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, dismissing their writ petition being W.P.No.11112/2021 (SC-

ST).

2. The appellants had filed the said writ petition seeking orders directing the respondents to forthwith restore possession of the land measuring one acre, bearing Survey No.37/6 (Plot No.37/6) situated at Munnenakolalu Village, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk (subject property), which was granted in favour of their father, since deceased. The appellants claim that their father was working as labourer in the brick manufacturing unit of late M. Bhoomi Reddy (father of respondent No. 4). The appellants claim that their father along with twenty others belonging to scheduled caste were granted lands measuring one acre each. At the material time, ten of the grantees including the appellants' father, were working as labourers in the brick manufacturing unit of Sri. Bhoomi Reddy (father of respondent No.4). The upset price for the land in question was fixed at Rs.300/- per acre. However, Rs.200/- per acre was waived as the grantees fell under the scheduled caste category, and only a sum of Rs.100/- per acre each was collected from them. The appellants claim that it was specifically mentioned in the grant order that the lands granted would not be alienated for a period of 15 years.

3. The appellants states that the said condition was not complied with and the father of the appellants as well as nine labourers, who were working in respondent No.4's father's factory, agreed to sell the lands granted to them at a price which was five times more than the amount paid by them. The appellants' father executed the sale deed dated 04.08.1967 in favour of Shri Bhoomi Reddy, father of respondent No.4. The appellants' claim that the said sale is void as the same was in contravention of the terms and conditions on which the lands were granted.

4. The appellants contend that the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 [the PTCL Act] came into force with effect from 01.01.1979 and pursuant to Section 4 of the said Act, the sale of the subject land in favour of respondent No.4's father was required to be declared as null and void.

5. After the PTCL Act came into force, proceedings were initiated under Section 5 of the PTCL Act in respect of the lands acquired by respondent No.4's father including the subject land. Respondent No.3 (Assistant Commissioner) passed an order dated