Sri. Venkataram Bhat Vs State of Karnataka

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE R2 IN CASE NO.LRF.SR.(DE)131/09-10 DATED 07.11.2014 VIDE ANNEXURE-D.

¶22

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

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for the respondents.

¶26

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of forfeiture dated 07.11.2014 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Bengalurur North Sub-Division, 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.

¶27

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that this

¶28

is a case where the impugned order of forfeiture has been passed by the Assistant Commissioner without notice to

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:31860 WP No. 1858 of 2024

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

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

¶32

hearing to the aggrieved person.

¶33

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.

¶34

Admittedly, as on the date of the Karnataka Land Reforms (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020, no proceedings were pending before any court/authority.

¶35

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

¶36

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:31860 WP No. 1858 of 2024

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

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.

¶39

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.

¶40

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

¶41

5 -

¶42

NC: 2025:KHC:31860 WP No. 1858 of 2024

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

and therefore, the benefit of the decision of the coordinate bench should also enure to the petitioner herein.

¶45

Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following:

¶46

ORDER

¶47

i) The writ petition is allowed in part.

¶48

ii) The impugned order dated 07.11.2014 passed in case No. L.R.F:SR:(De)131/09-10 is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶49

iii) 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.

¶50

iv) If revenue entries have been altered pursuant to the impugned order dated

¶51