Karnataka High Court
Shri. V L Somanathreddy S/O V. ... vs The Deputy Commissioner on 27 October, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14309
WP No. 101117 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
WRIT PETITION NO. 101117 OF 2025 (SCST)
BETWEEN:
SHRI. V.L. SOMANATHREDDY
S/O V. VENKATRAMANREDDY,
AGE. 40 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST,
R/O. NEAR BRAHMAIAH GUDI, KAPPAGAL ROAD,
BALLARI, TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI,
PIN-583 102.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. JAGADISH PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
BALLARI, TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI,
PIN-583 101.
Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
LAXMAN
KATTIMANI
Location: HIGH BALLARI, TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH PIN-583 101.
3. SHRI. HARIJAN MARIYAPPA
M/O HARIJAN KENCHAMMA AND
S/O HARIJAN KOLLARAPPA,
AGE ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST,
R/O. MUSHTAGATTE VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI, PIN-583 116.
4. SHRI. HARIJAN SHANTAPPA
M/O HARIJAN KENCHAMMA AND
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14309
WP No. 101117 of 2025
HC-KAR
S/O HARIJAN KOLLARAPPA,
AGE ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST,
R/O. MUSHTAGATTE VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI, PIN-583 116.
5. SHRI SHANTANGOUDA
S/O SANNA TIMMANAGOUDA,
AGE ABOUT 58 YEARS,
OCC. AGRICULTURIST,
R/O. GENEKEHAL VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI,
PIN-583 116.
6. SMT. TAPPADI GANGAPPA
S/O LATE TAPPADI IRAPPA,
AGE ABOUT 57 YEARS,
OCC. AGRICULTURIST,
R/O. KURUGODU VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI,
PIN-583 116.
7. SMT. MARIYAMMA D/O K. NAGENDRAPPA,
AGE ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST,
R/O. KURUGODU VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI,
PIN-583 116.
8. SHRI V. NANDISH FATHER LATE TAPPADI IRAPPA,
AGE ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST,
R/O. GENEKEHAL VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI,
PIN-583 116.
9. SMT. BADANAHATTI LAXMIDEVI
W/O BADANAHATTI YARISWAMI,
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14309
WP No. 101117 of 2025
HC-KAR
AGE ABOUT 54 YEARS,
OCC. AGRICULTURIST,
R/O. KOLAGAL VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI,
PIN-583 116.
10. SHRI BADANAHATTI DAYANAND
S/O BADANAHATTI YARISWAMI,
AGE ABOUT 52 YEARS,
OCC. AGRICULTURIST,
R/O. KOLAGAL VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI,
PIN-583 116.
11. THE TAHASILDAR,
KURUGODU, TQ. KURUGODU,
DIST. BALLARI, PIN-583 116.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, AGA FOR R1, R2 AND R11;
SRI. MAHESH WODEYAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3 AND R4;
NOTICE TO R6 AND R8 ARE DISPENSED WITH;
NOTICE TO R5 IS DELIVERED;
NOTICE TO R7, R9 AND R10 ARE SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A
WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDERS I.E.,
THE ORDER DATED 21/02/2024 PASSED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT IN NO.REV/PTCL/66/2023 PRODUCED VIDE
ANNEXURE-E, AND THE ORDER DATED 06/12/2024 PASSED BY
2ND RESPONDENT IN NO/REVENUE/PTCL/3/2024-25 PRODUCED
VIDE ANNEXURE-H AND ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.11 TO RESTORE THE ENTRY
OF NAME OF PETITIONER IN THE RECORD OF RIGHTS
PERTAINING TO R.S. NO.328/B1 (OLD NO.328/B).
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14309
WP No. 101117 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and
the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India by the petitioner assailing the order dated
21.02.2024 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Ballari, marked
as Annexure-E, and the order dated 06.12.2024 passed by the
Assistant Commissioner, Ballari, marked as Annexure-H.
3. In terms of the said order dated 21.02.2024, the
Deputy Commissioner has set aside the order dated 24.02.2022
passed by the Assistant Commissioner under the provisions of
Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of
Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 19781.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that
the property in question was granted to one Harijana
Mushtagatte Kenchamma in the year 1957. In the year 1973, the
original grantee sold the property to respondent No.5 under a
Hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1978'
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14309
HC-KAR
registered Sale Deed, which was executed prior to the
commencement of Act of 1978. It is further submitted that, in
the year 1996, respondent No.6 sold the property to respondent
No.7; thereafter, respondent No.7 sold the property to
respondent No.8; and in 2008, respondent No.8 sold the
property to the petitioner under a registered Sale Deed.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that,
since the land was sold prior to the commencement of Act of
1978, the provisions of the said Act cannot be applied. Assuming
that the provisions of the Act can be applied, there is an
inordinate delay on the part of the respondents in raising a
grievance in this regard.
6. In support of his contention, he would place reliance on
the judgment of the Apex Court in the cases of Nekkanti Ram
Lakshmi Vs. State of Karnataka and Others2 and Vivek M.
Hinduja Vs. M. Ashatha3.
7. Learned counsel appearing for the contesting
respondents would urge that the Assistant Commissioner has
(2020) 14 SCC 232
(2019) 1 Kar LJ 819 SC
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14309
HC-KAR
passed an order pursuant to the impugned order at Annexure-E
by which the Deputy Commissioner remanded the matter to the
Assistant Commissioner. Thus, the petitioner has to file an
appeal against the order marked at Annexure-H passed by the
Assistant Commissioner.
8. Since it is noticed that the claim has been raised 35
years after the sale, which has taken place in the year 1973, this
Court is of the view that there would be no justification for the
Court to direct the petitioner to approach the Deputy
Commissioner against the order passed by the Assistant
Commissioner.
9. The Court has also taken note of the fact that the
Assistant Commissioner has passed an order confiscating the
land in favour of the State on the premise that the provisions of
Act of 1978 have been violated.
10. Since the transaction has taken place in the year 1973
before the commencement of Act of 1978, and thereafter, few
more transactions have taken place, the action initiated by the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14309
HC-KAR
respondent/State and the contesting private respondents is hit
by delay and latches.
11. Hence the following:
ORDER
a) The writ petition is allowed.
b) The order dated 21.02.2024 passed by the
Deputy Commissioner, Ballari, marked as
Annexure-E and the order dated 06.12.2024
passed by the Assistant Commissioner,
Ballari, marked as Annexure-H are set aside.
c) The respondent/Authority shall restore the
name of the petitioner in the property
records within 30 days from the date of the
receipt of the copy of the order.
Sd/-
(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)
JUDGE
PMP
CT:BCK
