Karnataka High Court
Sri P Shankar vs The State Of Karnataka on 20 August, 2025
Author: R Devdas
Bench: R Devdas
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:32489
WP No. 22333 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS
WRIT PETITION NO. 22333 OF 2025 (LR-)
BETWEEN:
SRI P. SHANKAR,
S/O LATE PILLAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 37,
2ND CROSS, JAMBU SAVARI,
DINNE, S O S POST,
J. P. NAGAR 8TH PHASE,
BENGALURU - 560 076.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. N. R. NAIK, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY,
Digitally signed REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
by JUANITA
THEJESWINI VIDHANA SOUDHA,
Location: HIGH BANGALORE - 560 001.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
RAMANAGARA SUB DIVISION,
RAMANAGARA - 562 101.
3. THE TAHASILDAR
RAMANAGARA TALUK,
RAMANAGARA - 562 101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K. P. YOGANNA, AGA)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:32489
WP No. 22333 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN
NO.LRF/79(A)(B)/R/ 47/2015-16 DATED -NIL- IN RESPECT OF
THE LAND MEASURING INTO EXTENT OF 2 ACRES 09 GUNTAS
IN SY.NO. 166/2, SITUATED AT ARALALUSANDRA VILLAGE,
BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK PURCHASED BY
APPELLANT IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 79(A AND B) OF
KARNATAKA LAND REFORMS ACT, WHICH IS PRODUCED AT
ANNEXURE-D AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS
ORAL ORDER
Learned Additional Government Advocate takes
notice for all the respondents.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of
forfeiture dated 05.12.2016 passed by the Assistant
Commissioner, Ramanagara Sub-Division, Ramanagara,
under the provisions of Section 83 for violation of the
NC: 2025:KHC:32489
HC-KAR
provisions contained in Sections 79-A and 79-B of the
Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that
this is a case where the impugned order of forfeiture has
been passed by the Assistant Commissioner without notice
to the petitioner. It is further submitted that under similar
circumstances, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in
W.P.No.7821/2021 has passed an order dated 16.08.2021
remanding the matter back to the Assistant Commissioner
for fresh consideration after affording an opportunity of
hearing to the aggrieved person.
4. Learned Additional Government Advocate
points out from the impugned order that notice was indeed
issued to the petitioner and in spite of notice having been
issued, the petitioner did not appear before the Assistant
Commissioner.
NC: 2025:KHC:32489
HC-KAR
5. Admittedly, as on the date of the Karnataka
Land Reforms (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020, no
proceedings were pending before any court/authority.
6. This Court had several occasions to consider
such cases, where writ petitions are filed long after the
provisions contained in Sections 79A, 79B and 79C were
omitted from the statute book in terms of the Karnataka
Land Reforms (Second Amendment) Act, 2020. It is the
consistent opinion of this Court that if at any rate, the
Assistant Commissioner, after forfeiting the land has not
disposed of the same in accordance with law then the
benefit of the saving clause contained in Section 12 of the
Amending Act is required to be given to such petitioners.
The Assistant Commissioner is therefore, required to
ascertain, whether the declared excess lands or forfeited
lands still remain with the State Government or has been
granted to third parties. If the lands have been granted to
third party, then sub-section(1) of Section 12 of the
amending Act will apply to say that the proceedings have
NC: 2025:KHC:32489
HC-KAR
reached finality. Or otherwise, sub-section (2) of Section
12 of the Amending Act will apply and all further
proceedings shall be declared as abated by the Assistant
Commissioner.
7. Having considered the submission of the
learned Counsels and on perusing the judgment of the co-
ordinate Bench in W.P.No.7821/2021, this Court finds that
facts and circumstances in both these matters are quite
similar and therefore, the benefit of the decision of the co-
ordinate bench should also enure to the petitioner herein.
8. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the
following:
ORDER
i) The writ petition is disposed of.
ii) The matter is remanded back to the
respondent-Assistant Commissioner to
consider the case of the petitioner including
the consequences of the subsequent
amendment brought to the provisions of
NC: 2025:KHC:32489
HC-KAR
Sections 79-A and 79-B of the Karnataka
Land Reforms Act in Karnataka Amendment
No.56 of 2020.
iii) If revenue entries have been altered
pursuant to the impugned order dated
05.12.2016, the same shall be restored in
favour of the petitioner.
iv) The petitioner shall appear before the
respondent-Assistant Commissioner on
08.09.2025, without waiting for further
notice from the Assistant Commissioner.
Ordered accordingly.
Learned Additional Government Advocate is
permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of
four weeks from today.
Sd/-
(R DEVDAS)
JUDGE
rv
CT: UR
