Smt. Prathima K M Vs the State of Karnataka

SMT. PRATHIMA K M AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, W/O. SRI. MURALI K.V., R/A 6, 2^ND FLOOR, V.S.C. STREET, BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU 560 004. (BY SRI. LOKESH R., ADVOCATE)

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT, MULTI-STORIED BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560 001, BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶14

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU SOUTH SUB-DIVISION, KHANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU 560 009.

¶15

THE TAHSILDAR, ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL 562 106.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR., AGA)

¶18

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:10375 WP No. 36209 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS FROM THE RESPONDENTS WITH RESPECT TO PROCEEDINGS BEARING NO. LRF (83) (AS)/26/1997-98 AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE 1^ST RESPONDENT DATED 07.09.2018 IN PROCEEDINGS BEARING NO.LRF(83)(AS)/26/1997-98 VIDE ANNEXURE-H CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION HOLDING THAT THE PETITIONER HAS PURCHASED THE LAND IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ETC.

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for all the respondents.

¶25

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of forfeiture dated 07.09.2018 passed by the respondentAssistant Commissioner invoking the provisions of Section 83 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, for violation of the provisions contained in Section 79A and 79B of the Act.

¶26

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that this is a case where the impugned order of forfeiture has

¶27

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:10375 WP No. 36209 of 2025

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

been passed by the respondent-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.

¶30

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.

¶31

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

¶32

This Court had several occasions to consider such

¶33

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

¶34

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:10375 WP No. 36209 of 2025

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

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 proceedings shall be declared as abated by the Assistant Commissioner.

¶37

Having considered the submissions 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

¶38

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:10375 WP No. 36209 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

and circumstances in both these matters are quite similar

¶41

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 . 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.

¶45

iii) If revenue entries have been altered pursuant to the impugned order dated 07.09.2018, the same shall be restored in favour of the petitioner.

¶46

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:10375 WP No. 36209 of 2025

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

iv) The petitioner shall appear before the respondent-Assistant Commissioner on 05^th March 2026 , without waiting for further notice from the Assistant Commissioner.

¶49

Ordered accordingly.

¶50

Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of.

¶51

Sd/(R DEVDAS) JUDGE

¶52

DL CT: JL

Smt. Prathima K M v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Prathima K M 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 Ravi a M Vs the State of Karnataka

Narasimhamurthy Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Sreya Anuj Kumar Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri H R Mani Kumar Vs the State of Karnataka

Manjunath N Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri C B Devaraju Vs the State of Karnataka