Allowed

Venkataiah v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC16 Sept 2026WP/24608/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka quashed the Assistant Commissioner's order dated 25.11.2021 that ordered resumption of Sy.No.382/A measuring 20 guntas, originally granted in 1956 and purchased by the petitioner's father in 1963. The resumption proceedings were initiated for Sy.No.382/C, not 382/A, and the petitioner was not a party to those proceedings. The Deputy Commissioner's appeal dismissal on procedural grounds was also quashed. The court directed restoration of the petitioner's name in revenue records for Sy.No.382/A.

What did the court decide?

Orders of the Assistant Commissioner dated 25.11.2021 and Deputy Commissioner dated 27.01.2026 quashed; direction to restore petitioner's name in revenue records for Sy.No.382/A.

Venkataiah Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

NC: 2026:KHC:50454 WP No. 24608 of 2026

¶4

CNR: KAHC010537542026

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶6

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026

¶7

BEFORE

¶8

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 24608 OF 2026 (SC/ST)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

VENKATAIAH, S/O.LATE MARIGOWDA, AGED 79 YEARS, R/OF MUTTANAHALLI VILLAGE, C A KERE HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK, NOW R/AT NO.17, 6TH CROSS, SWARNASANDRA COLONY, MANDYA-571403.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. SREENIVASAN M.Y., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.

¶16

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MANDYA SUB-DIVISION, MANDYA-571401.

¶17

TAHASILDAR, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571421.

¶18

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC:50454 WP No. 24608 of 2026

¶21

CNR: KAHC010537542026

¶22

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MANDYA, MANDYA DISTRICT-571401.

¶23

C.KEMPAIAH, S/O. LATE CHANNA @ CHANNAIAH, MAJOR,

¶24

CHIKKACHANNAIAH, S/O. LATE CHANNA @ CHANNAIAH, MAJOR,

¶25

SANNAMMA, D/O. LATE CHANNA @ CHANNAIAH, MAJOR,

¶26

CHIKKAKEMPAMMA @ KEMPAMMA, D/O. LATE CHANNA @ CHANNAIAH, MAJOR,

¶27

PUTTAGOWRAMMA, D/O. LATE CHANNA @ CHANNAIAH, MAJOR,

¶28

CHINTRAMMA @ SAVITRAMMA, D/O LATE CHANNA @ CHANNAIAH, MAJOR,

¶29

KALAMMA D/O LATE CHANNA @ CHANNAIAH, MAJOR,

¶30

CHANNAPPA

¶31

S/O LATE CHANNA @ CHANNAIAH, MAJOR,

¶32

1. KEMPAMAMA D/O LATE CHANNA @ CHANNAIAH, MAJOR,

¶33

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

NC: 2026:KHC:50454 WP No. 24608 of 2026

¶36

CNR: KAHC010537542026

¶37

14. PADMAMMA D/O LATE CHANNA @ CHANNAIAH, MAJOR,

¶38

RESPONDENTS NO.5 TO 14 ARE RESIDING AT KANNALI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK AND DISTRICT-571405

¶39

DEVAMMA

¶40

W/O LATE HELAVEGOWDA, MAJOR

¶41

SOMANNA S/O LATE HELAVEGOWDA, MAJOR

¶42

VENKATESH S/O LATE HELAVEGOWDA, MAJOR

¶43

RESPONDENTS NO.15 TO 17 ARE RESIDING AT MUTTANAHALLI VILLAGE, C A KERE HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571422

¶44

…RESPONDENTS

¶45

(BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 07.08.2026, NOTICE TO R5 TO R17 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶46

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.

¶47

THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:

¶48

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

NC: 2026:KHC:50454 WP No. 24608 of 2026

¶51

CNR: KAHC010537542026

¶52

ORAL ORDER

¶53

Sri. M. Y. Sreenivasan, counsel for the petitioner, and

¶54

Smt. Savithramma, AGA for respondents 1 to 4, appeared in person.

¶55

The petition is filed seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner. These orders are challenged in this writ petition on several grounds, as set out in the memorandum of the writ petition.

¶56

Counsel appearing for the respective parties urged several contentions. The arguments were heard, and the papers were perused with care.

¶57

Suffice it to note that Sy.No.382/A, measuring 20 guntas, was granted to one Mr. Kempaiah, S/o. Kalaiah, on 20.06.1956. The LRs. of the original grantee sold the property in favor of the petitioner's father on 25.08.1963.

¶58

¶59

HC-KAR

¶60

NC: 2026:KHC:50454 WP No. 24608 of 2026

¶61

CNR: KAHC010537542026

¶62

As things stood, in 2015-16, proceedings were

¶63

initiated for resumption of the land by certain persons, namely C.Kempaiah and others, in respect of Sy.No.382/C. The respondents are Venkataiah and others, who were the purchasers of 382/C. However, the Assistant Commissioner, vide order dated 25.11.2021, allowed the claim and ordered resumption in respect of 382/A, which was never the subject matter of the resumption application.

¶64

After the Assistant Commissioner's order, mutations in respect of 382/A were carried out by deleting the petitioner's name from the revenue records. The petitioner

¶65

only learned about the resumption order afterwards, prompting him to approach the Assistant Commissioner to contest the MR entries. The Assistant Commissioner dismissed the petition on 06.12.2024, ruling that the order

¶66

was made under the PTCL Act and instructing the petitioner to appeal to the Deputy Commissioner. The

¶67

¶68

HC-KAR

¶69

NC: 2026:KHC:50454 WP No. 24608 of 2026

¶70

CNR: KAHC010537542026

¶71

petitioner then appealed to the Deputy Commissioner. However, on 27.01.2026, the Deputy Commissioner rejected the appeal, stating it was filed under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act and not under

¶72

the PTCL Act, dismissing it at the outset. This decision is legally flawed because the resumption application was filed for 382/C; the original grantee of Sy.No.382/A never applied for resumption. Also, the order's cause title, as seen in Annexure-C, shows the petitioner was not involved in the proceedings, yet the order resuming land was made without an application for that survey number. Therefore, the Assistant Commissioner lacked authority to order land resumption for Sy.No.382/A.

¶73

For the reasons stated above, the order dated 25.11.2021 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, as set out in Annexure C, as far as Sy.No.382/A is quashed. Consequent, orders of the Assistant Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner are quashed. As this Court has

¶74

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:50454 WP No. 24608 of 2026

¶75

HC-KAR

¶76

CNR: KAHC010537542026

¶77

quashed the orders, the authority concerned is hereby directed to restore the petitioner's name in respect of Sy.No.382/A.

¶78

Resultantly, the writ petition is allowed .

¶79

On disposal of the Writ Petition, any interim order stands discharged, and any pending interlocutory

¶80

applications, if any, are disposed of.

¶81

Sd/(JYOTI M) JUDGE

¶82

MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46

Venkataiah v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Venkataiah v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases