Sri P Shankar Vs the State of Karnataka

SRI P. SHANKAR, S/O LATE PILLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 37, 2^ND CROSS, JAMBU SAVARI, DINNE, S O S POST, J. P. NAGAR 8^TH PHASE, BENGALURU – 560 076.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. N. R. NAIK, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI

¶15

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE – 560 001.

¶17

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER RAMANAGARA SUB DIVISION, RAMANAGARA – 562 101.

¶18

THE TAHASILDAR RAMANAGARA TALUK, RAMANAGARA – 562 101.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. K. P. YOGANNA, AGA)

¶21

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:32489 WP No. 22333 of 2025

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 2^ND RESPONDENT IN NO.LRF/79(A)(B)/R/ 47/2015-16 DATED -NIL- IN RESPECT OF THE LAND MEASURING INTO EXTENT OF 2 ACRES 09 GUNTAS IN SY.NO. 166/2, SITUATED AT ARALALUSANDRA VILLAGE, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK PURCHASED BY APPELLANT IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 79(A AND B) OF KARNATAKA LAND REFORMS ACT, WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D AND ETC.,

¶24

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

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for all the respondents.

¶28

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of forfeiture dated 05.12.2016 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Ramanagara Sub-Division, Ramanagara, under the provisions of Section 83 for violation of the

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:32489 WP No. 22333 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

provisions contained in Sections 79-A and 79-B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961.

¶32

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶33

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.

¶34

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.

¶35

4 -

¶36

NC: 2025:KHC:32489 WP No. 22333 of 2025

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

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

¶39

This Court had several occasions to consider

¶40

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

¶41

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:32489 WP No. 22333 of 2025

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

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.

¶44

Having considered the submission of the learned Counsels and on perusing the judgment of the coordinate 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 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 disposed of .

¶48

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

¶49

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:32489 WP No. 22333 of 2025

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

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

¶52

iii) If revenue entries have been altered pursuant to the impugned order dated 05.12.2016, the same shall be restored in favour of the petitioner.

¶53

iv) The petitioner shall appear before the respondent-Assistant Commissioner on 08.09.2025 , without waiting for further notice from the Assistant Commissioner.

¶54

Ordered accordingly.

¶55

Learned Additional Government Advocate is

¶56

permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today.

¶57

Sd/(R DEVDAS) JUDGE

¶58

rv

¶59

CT: UR

Sri P Shankar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri P Shankar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri K K Mahesh Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Chaluvarajegowda Vs State of Karnataka

Shri Muninanjappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Jitesh B P Vs the Govenment of Karnataka

Smt. Nandini K N Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri P Shankar Vs the State of Karnataka