Karnataka High Court
Shri B C Anil Kumar vs Deputy Commissioner on 8 September, 2025
Author: R Devdas
Bench: R Devdas
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:35257
WP No. 9889 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS
WRIT PETITION NO.9889 OF 2024 (LR)
BETWEEN:
SHRI B. C. ANIL KUMAR
S/O. B. V. CHANDRAPPA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
R/AT NO.1299, "CHOWDESHWARI NILAYA"
BRINDAVAN LAYOUT, KADUGODI
BENGALURU - 560 067.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI GIRI K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT
RAMANAGAR - 562 159.
2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
Digitally signed by DODDABALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION
DHARMALINGAM
DODDABALLAPURA - 561 203.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 3. TAHSILDAR
DEVANAHALLI TALUK
DEVANAHALLI - 562 110.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K. P. YOGANNA, A.G.A.)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
LRF: SR (DE) 253/2014-15, DATED 30/11/2018, AT
ANNEXURE-A, ISSUED BY THE R-2, FORFEITING THE LAND IN
OLD SY. NO. 85/6 AND OLD SY. NO. 85/2, (NEW SY. NO.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:35257
WP No. 9889 of 2024
HC-KAR
85/8), SITUATED AT VENKATAGIRIKOTE VILLAGE, VIJAYPURA
HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, MEASURING TO AN EXTENT OF
0.25 GUNTAS AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of forfeiture
dated 30.11.2018 passed by the respondent-Assistant
Commissioner invoking the provisions of Section 83 of the
Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 for violation of the
provisions contained in Sections 79A and 79B of the Act.
2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has rightly
pointed out to the discrepancy in the name found in the
impugned order passed by the Assistant Commissioner. It
is pointed out that in the first page while describing the
respondent it is stated as Sri B.C. Sunil Kumar, son of
B.V.Chandrappa, however, in the operative portion it is
correctly shown as Sri B.C. Anil Kumar, S/o
NC: 2025:KHC:35257
HC-KAR
B.V.Chandrappa, which is the correct name of the
petitioner.
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:35257
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:35257
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:35257
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
30.11.2018, the same shall be restored in
favour of the petitioner.
iv) The petitioner shall appear before the
respondent-Assistant Commissioner on 26th
September 2025, without waiting for
further notice from the Assistant
Commissioner.
Ordered accordingly.
Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(R DEVDAS)
JUDGE
JT/-
CT:VC
