Smt. S. Shameem K M vs The Assistant Commissioner
2025 Latest Caselaw 8281 Kant

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 8281 Kant
Judgement Date : 11 September, 2025

Karnataka High Court

Smt. S. Shameem K M vs The Assistant Commissioner on 11 September, 2025

Author: R Devdas

Bench: R Devdas

                                              -1-
                                                        NC: 2025:KHC:35954
                                                      WP No. 19917 of 2023


                 HC-KAR




                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                      DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

                                             BEFORE
                           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS
                          WRIT PETITION NO. 19917 OF 2023 (LR)
                BETWEEN:

                SMT. S. SHAMEEM K M
                W/O FAKRUDEEN SHARIF
                AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
                R/A NO.27-177/1/2/2
                REHAMAN NAGAR
                PUNGANOOR-517247
                CHITTOOR DISTRICT
                ANDHRA PRADESH.
                                                               ...PETITIONER
                (BY SRI. GIRI.K, ADVOCATE)
                AND:

                1.    THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
                      BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK
Digitally             BENGALURU - 560 002.
signed by
CHANDANA        2.    THE TAHASILDAR
BM                    BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK
Location:             BENGALURU - 560 002.
High Court of                                               ...RESPONDENTS
Karnataka       (BY SRI.K. MANJUNATH, HCGP)

                      THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE
                CONSTITUITON OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE LRF (83) (AK)
                06/2015-16, DTD 31.08.2018 AT ANNEXURE-A, ISSUED BY THE R1,
                FORFEITING THE LAND IN SY.149/1, MEASURING TO AN EXTENT OF
                0.05.8 GUNTAS, SITUATED AT INDLAVADIPURA VILLAGE, KASABA
                HOBLIL, ANEKAL TALUK, THROUGH A SALE DEED DTD 09.03.2012,
                REGISTERED AS DOCUMENT NO. ANK-1-05269/2011-12, STORE IN
                CD.NO.ANKD308, IN THE OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR, ANEKAL
                AND ANNEXURE-B.
                              -2-
                                          NC: 2025:KHC:35954
                                      WP No. 19917 of 2023


HC-KAR



      THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:



CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS


                       ORAL ORDER

Learned High Court Government Pleader takes notice

for respondents.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of

forfeiture dated 31.08.2018 passed by the Assistant

Commissioner, Bengaluru South Taluk, Bengaluru, under

the provisions of Section 83 for violation of the 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

NC: 2025:KHC:35954

HC-KAR

for fresh consideration after affording an opportunity of

hearing to the aggrieved person.

4. Learned High Court Government Pleader 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.

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

NC: 2025:KHC:35954

HC-KAR

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

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.

NC: 2025:KHC:35954

HC-KAR

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

Sections 79-A and 79-B of the Karnataka

Land Reforms Act in Karnataka Amendment

No.56 of 2020.