Suresh vs State Of Karnataka
2026 Latest Caselaw 3064 Kant

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 3064 Kant
Judgement Date : 8 April, 2026

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Suresh vs State Of Karnataka on 8 April, 2026

Author: R Devdas

Bench: R Devdas

                                               -1-
                                                            NC: 2026:KHC:19276
                                                           WP No. 6968 of 2026


                   HC-KAR



                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                            DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

                                             BEFORE
                              THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS
                             WRIT PETITION NO. 6968 OF 2026 (LR)
                   BETWEEN:

                   SURESH
                   S/O APPAJAPPA
                   AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
                   R/AT ATTIKUPPE VILLAGE,
                   HANAGODU HOBLI, HUNSUR TALUK,
                   MYSURU DISTRICT- 571 105.
                                                                  ...PETITIONER
                   (BY SRI. PRITHVI RAJ B.N., ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.    STATE OF KARNATAKA
                         REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,
Digitally signed         REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
by JUANITA
THEJESWINI               M.S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
Location: HIGH           BENGALURU-560 001.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
                   2.    THE ASST. COMMISSIONER,
                         HUNSUR SUB-DIVISION,
                         HUNSUR, MYSURU DIST- 571 105.

                   3.    THE TAHSILDAR,
                         HUNSUR TALUK,
                         HUNSUR, MYSURU DIST. 571 105.
                                                               ...RESPONDENTS
                   (BY SRI. V.SESHU, HCGP)
                              -2-
                                          NC: 2026:KHC:19276
                                        WP No. 6968 of 2026


HC-KAR



     THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED
ORDER DATED.27-7-2013 PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER IN LRF/192/2012-13, AT ANNEXURE-A., AND
ETC.

    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 all the respondents.

2. This writ petition has been filed aggrieved by

the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner in

proceedings bearing No.L.R.F/192/2012-13 dated

27.07.2013 at Annexure-A.

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

NC: 2026:KHC:19276

HC-KAR

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 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

NC: 2026:KHC:19276

HC-KAR

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 petitioner.

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

NC: 2026:KHC:19276

HC-KAR

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 Sections 79-A and 79-B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act in Karnataka Amendment No.56 of 2020.