Disposed

Sri P C Narayanareddy v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC26 Feb 2026WP/33787/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition against a 1997 forfeiture order under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act. The Court remanded the matter to the Assistant Commissioner to consider the effect of the 2020 amendment and directed restoration of revenue entries if altered.

What did the court decide?

Matter remanded to the Assistant Commissioner for fresh consideration including consequences of Karnataka Amendment No.56 of 2020; altered revenue entries to be restored in favour of the petitioner.

Sri P C Narayanareddy Vs the State of Karnataka — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:12079 WP No. 33787 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 33787 OF 2025 (LR)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI P C NARAYANAREDDY S/O. VENKATAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT HONNAVARA VILLAGE, MADHURE HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-561203. PERMANENTLY R/A NO. 2-82, KARADU, POLERAMMARALLA CENTRE, PRAKASHAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH -523101.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. R.S.RAVI., SR. ADVCOATE FOR Digitally signed by JUANITA SRI. D.T. NANJESH GOWDA., ADVOCATE) THEJESWINI

¶12

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

AND:

¶14

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

¶15

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DODDABALLAPURA SUB DIVISION, DODDABALLAPURA,

¶16

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:12079 WP No. 33787 of 2025

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT – 561203.

¶19

THE TAHASILDAR, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, DODDABALLAPURA, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 561203

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR., AGA)

¶22

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD14.10.1997 IN CASE IN NO. LRF-SR-12-96-97 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-D AND ISSUE ANY SUCH OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION WHICH THE HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.,

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

This writ petition has been filed aggrieved by the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner in proceedings bearing No.LRF:SR:12:96-97 dated 14.10.2017 at Annexure-D.

¶27

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:12079 WP No. 33787 of 2025

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶30

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.

¶31

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.

¶32

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

¶33

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:12079 WP No. 33787 of 2025

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

This Court had several occasions to consider

¶36

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 reached finality. Or otherwise, sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Amending Act will apply and all further

¶37

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:12079 WP No. 33787 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

proceedings shall be declared as abated by the Assistant Commissioner.

¶40

Having considered the submission of the

¶41

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.

¶42

Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following:

¶43

ORDER

¶44

i) The writ petition is disposed of .

¶45

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.

¶46

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:12079 WP No. 33787 of 2025

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

iii) If revenue entries have been altered pursuant to the impugned order dated 14.10.1997, the same shall be restored in favour of the petitioner.

¶49

iv) The petitioner shall appear before the respondent-Assistant Commissioner on 16.03.2026 , without waiting for further notice from the Assistant Commissioner.

¶50

Ordered accordingly.

¶51

Sd/(R DEVDAS) JUDGE

¶52

JT/CT: JL

Sri P C Narayanareddy v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri P C Narayanareddy 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Sadananda Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Doddathimmaiah Vs Deputy Commissioner

Smt. Shobha Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri K L Narayan Murthy Vs Sri Chaya Prakash

Sri. Venkteshappa Vs State of Karnataka

Vaikuntam Apartment Vs Assistant Commissioner