IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK.S.KINAGI

WRIT PETITION NO.12284 OF 2014 (SC/ST)

BETWEEN:

SMT. NARAYANAMMA

W/O SRI. PILLANARAYANAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

R/AT SOPPAHALLI VILLAGE,

KASABA HOBLI,

CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK &

DISTRICT-562101.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR S, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,

M.S.BUILDING,

DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDI,

BANGALORE-560001.

REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

CHIKKABALLAPUR,

CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT - 562 101.

3.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

CHIKKABALLAPUR SUB-DIVISION,

CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT- 562 101.

2

4.

SRI.S.D. NARASIMHAMURTHY,

S/O LATE A.K.NARASIMHAIAH,

@ DOOMONU @ DOOMAPPA,

MAJOR IN AGE,

R/A SOPPAHALLI VILLAGE,

KASABA HOBLI,

CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK &

DISTRICT - 562 101.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SANDESH KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3;

SRI. VISHWANATH R HEGDE, ADV. FOR R4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES

226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING

TO QUASH ANNX-H THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R-3

DT.18.3.2011 & ANNX-J THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R-

2 IN R.A.(SCST)59 /2010-11 DT.17.2.2014 IS ILLEGAL

& SET ASIDE THE SAME & DISMISS THE PETITION

FILED BY THE R-4 BY ALLOWING THIS W.P. AND ETC.,

THIS

WRIT

PETITION

COMING

ON

FOR

PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE

COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated

18.03.2011 passed by the respondent No.3 vide Annexure-

H and the order dated 17.02.2014 passed by respondent

No.2 at Annexure-J, has filed this writ petition.

2.

Brief facts leading to filing of this writ petition

are that:

3

The land in Sy.No.101 was granted in favour of A.K.

Narasimhaiah on 01.06.1957. On the same day, land

bearing survey No.200 situated at Soppa Village, Kasaba

Hobli, Chikkaballapur Taluk was granted in favour of father

of respondent No.4 i.e., A.K. Narasimhaiah. Father of A.K.

Narasimhaiah had executed a registered sale deed dated

10.07.1968. Respondent No.4 filed an application Section

5 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

(Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (for

short 'the PTCL Act') alleging that sale deed dated

10.07.1968 is in violation of Section 4 of the PTCL Act and

sought for cancellation of sale deed and for restoration of

land. Respondent No.3, after holding an enquiry held that

sale deed is in violation of Section 4(1) of the PTCL Act,

allowed the application filed by the respondent No.4 and

declared the sale deed as null and void and ordered to

restore the land in favour of respondent No.4. The

petitioner being aggrieved by the order passed by

respondent No.3, preferred an appeal before respondent

No.2. Respondent No.2 after hearing the parties confirmed

4

the order passed by respondent No.3 and consequently

dismissed the appeal. The petitioner being aggrieved by

the orders passed by respondent No.2 & 3, has filed this

writ petition.

3.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,

learned HCGP for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and also learned

counsel for respondent No.4.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the land in survey No.101/3 (new No.101/10) measuring 1

acre 32 guntas and survey No.101/8 measuring 1 acre 32

guntas was granted in favour of A.K. Narasimhaiah under

grant order dated 01.06.1957. Original grantee executed a

registered sale deed on 10.07.1968. Respondent No.4 filed

an application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act in the year

2007. He submits that there is a delay of 40 years in filing

an application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act. He submits

that there is inordinate delay in invoking Section 5 of the

PTCL Act. In support of his arguments, he places reliance

on the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of

5

Nekkanti Rama Lakshmi vs State of K