SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 27957

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
T.M. Nadaf, J
SRI MACHI MADIWALARA KESHMABHIVRIDHI SANGHA (R) – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
W.A.No.1989/2025 | W.A.No.833/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sri.I.Tharanath Poojary, Sri.M.N.Sudev Hegde, Sri.Marilinge Gowda
For the Respondents: Dr.Aditya Sondi, Sri.Karthik.V, Ms.Pavithra.N, Sri.I.Tharanath Poojari, Sri.M.N.Sudev Hegde

Reclassification of A-Kharab to B-Kharab land requires notice and inquiry under Rule 21 of Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966; unexplained delay defeats State action; pre-existing grants not challenged by vendor are protected.

Headnote:(A) Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966 - Rule 21 - Reclassification of land from A-Kharab to B-Kharab - Notice and hearing required before reclassification - Principles of natural justice - Any action bypassing the procedure under Rule 21 is unsustainable. (Paras 15, 16)

(B) Limitation - Delay and laches - Unexplained bureaucratic lethargy in taking action after a long period is fatal - State cannot claim exception to delay and laches - Doctrine of delay and laches must not be brushed aside. (Paras 12-14)

(C) A-Kharab land - Legal implication - A-Kharab land remains under possession and control of the landholder and does not vest in the State - Reclassification to B-Kharab cannot be done by executive fiat without inquiry and opportunity of hearing. (Para 14)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner claimed ownership of 04 Acres 18 Guntas of land including 04 Acres 09 Guntas of Kharab land in Sy.No.26/1, based on a registered Sale Deed dated 25.11.2013. The original grant was made in 1966 to R.K.Muthukrishna. On 13.05.2009, the Deputy Commissioner passed an order allotting 01 Acre 20 Guntas to respondent No.5 (BBMP). The petitioner filed a Revision which was allowed in 2015 recognizing his rights. Subsequently, the Technical Assistant to Deputy Commissioner passed an order on 01.09.2023 reclassifying 03 Acres 20 Guntas from A-Kharab to B-Kharab, allegedly without notice. The Writ Court quashed the orders.

Findings of Court:
The Court held that the reclassification was without following due process under Rule 21 and principles of natural justice. However, since the vendor did not challenge the grant of 01 Acre 20 Guntas to respondent No.5 in 2009, and the petitioner purchased the land later in 2013, the grant to respondent No.5 was saved.

Issues: Whether reclassification of A-Kharab land to B-Kharab without notice and inquiry is valid? Whether delay and laches bar the State from reclassifying lands after a long period? Whether the grant of land to respondent No.5, made before the petitioner's purchase, is protected?

Ratio Decidendi: Reclassification of A-Kharab land to B-Kharab requires a detailed inquiry with notice and hearing as per Rule 21. Unexplained delay in taking action is fatal. However, a grant made prior to the petitioner's purchase, which was not challenged by the vendor, is protected by acquiescence.

Result: Appeals partly allowed - order of Writ Court set aside only to the extent of saving the grant of 01 Acre 20 Guntas to respondent No.5.

Table of Content
1. background facts and sequence of events leading to the appeals (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. arguments of parties on reclassification and limitation (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
3. court's analysis on delay, rule 21, and reclassification legality (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
4. court's final decision modifying writ court order (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M. NADAF)

These appeals, being W.A.No.1989/2025 by the State and its instrumentalities and W.A.No.833/2025 by respondent No.5 in the Writ Petition, calling in question the order dated 25.04.2025 passed by the Writ Court in W.P.No.3148/2024.

2. The Writ Court vide impugned order allowed the Writ Petition, set-aside the order dated 13.05.2009 passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Annexure-E) and the order dated 01.09.2023 passed by the Technical Assistant to Deputy Commissioner (Annexure-R) with further direction in a time bound manner.

3. The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Writ Court.

4. Facts germane to file these appeals are as under:

5. At the outset, as per the rival contentions of both the parties, we are called upon to deliberate upon the issue of delay on the part of the State instrumentalities in re-classification of mode of land from A-Kharab to B Kharab, that too as per the contentions of the petitioner without issuing any notice as contemplated under Rule 21 of Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966 .

5.1 The petitioner filed the Writ Petition seeking following reliefs:

"MAIN PRAYER

Wherefore, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to:

i. Issue a Writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ or direction quashing the order dated 13.05.2009 in No.LND(Poo)CR:47/07-08 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru a copy of which is produced at Annexure-E.

ii. Issue a Writ of certiorari or any other writ or direction quashing the order dated 1.9.2023 passed by the Technical Assistant to Deputy Commissioner & Designated D D L R, office of Deputy Commissioner, Kandaya Bhavan, Bengaluru 560 009, a copy of which is produced at Annexure-R.

iii. Grant such other reliefs, as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity."

5.2 The petitioner claims that he is the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of 04 Acres 18 Guntas of land including 04 Acres 09 Guntas of Kharab land in Sy.No.26/1. The petitioner traces title based on registered Sale Deed dated 25.11.2013 executed by the erstwhile owner of the property.

5.3 The petitioner claims that the originally, the land to an extent of 05 Acres and 04 Acres 09 Guntas of Kharab land was granted to R.K.Muthukrishna in Sy.No.26 of Basavanapura, K.R.Puram Hobli, Bengaluru South vide order dated 30.08.1966. Following the grant, Saguvali Chit was issued (Annexures-B and C respectively). Subsequently, the land was subjected to durasth and the extent was corrected as 04 Acres 28 Guntas instead of 05 Acres along with 04 Acres 09 guntas kharab land and the land granted to petitioner's vendor was assigned a fresh Sy.No.26/1 as per Annexure-D in the year 1983.

5.4 It was contended that on 13.05.2009, the then Deputy Commissioner11 'DC', for short passed an order allotting an extent of 01 Acre 20 Guntas of land in Sy.No.26 in favour of respondent No.5 - Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike22 the BBMP, for short through an Official Memorandum dated 08.07.2009. Aggrieved by the said act of the then DC allotting the land which according to the petitioner forms part in the land belonging to his vendor which was conveyed to him subsequently under the aforesaid sale deed, filed a Revision before the DC seeking to establish his title and possession in question as well as other adjoining lands. After initiation of the Revision, an inquiry was conducted by the DC and upon detailed consideration of the records and materials available, an order dated 24.11.2015 came to be passed as per Annexure-G, unequivocally

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top