Sri Lokeshappa v. The Deputy Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 23852 OF 2021 (SC/ST) BETWEEN:

¶1SRI. LOKESHAPPA, S/O. BASAPPA H., AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,

¶2SRI. REVAPPA R.B., S/O. BASAPPA H., AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,

BOTH ARE R/O. DHONIHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577213. …PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. YOGESH V.KOTEMATH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VIRUPAKSHAIAH P.H., ADVOCATE)

AND:

¶1THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT, DAVANAGERE - 577001.

¶2THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DAVANAGERE SUB DIVISION, DAVANAGERE - 577001.

¶3THE TAHSILDHAR, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, CHANNAGIRI, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577213.

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶4SRI. A.K.NAGAPPA, S/O. SANJEEVAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O. YEREHALLI VILLAGE, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577213. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. KASHINATH J.D., ADVOCATE R4)

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

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

ORAL ORDER

Sri. Yogesh V. Kotemath, counsel for the petitioners; Smt. Savithramma, AGA for respondents 1 to 3; and Sri. Kashinath J. D., counsel for respondent No. 4, appeared in person.

¶2The petition is filed seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 08.03.2017 passed by the second respondent No.2 vide Annexure-C, and the order dated

17.12.2021 passed by the first respondent vide Annexure-G.

These orders are called into question in this writ petition on several grounds as set out in the memorandum of the writ petition.

¶3Counsel for the respective parties advanced several contentions.

The counsel for respondent No.4 argues that an amendment to Section 5 of the PTCL Act means the delay should not be considered relevant to the proceedings.

¶4Heard the arguments and carefully perused the papers.

¶5This issue is limited to resumption proceedings. The land in question, Sy.No.15/17, spans 3 acres at Sarathi Village, Kasaba Hobli, Channagiri Taluk, Davanagere District. It was granted to Mr. Rangappa on 09.09.1963. Later, he sold the property to petitioner No.1 through a registered sale deed dated 07.12.1991.

Nearly 26 years after the sale, proceedings under Section 5 of the Act were initiated in 2017 before the Assistant

Commissioner, requesting land resumption. The Assistant Commissioner approved the petition and ordered the land to be resumed. Dissatisfied, an appeal was filed with the Deputy Commissioner, who upheld the original order. However, both the Assistant and Deputy Commissioners overlooked the significant delay of nearly 26 years in initiating these proceedings. They failed to consider the issue of laches or the petitioners' claim that the proceedings were begun after an unreasonable delay.

The authorities should have evaluated whether to proceed after nearly 26 years, especially since rights related to the land were settled by the sale deed dated 07.12.1991. The oversight in considering the delay and laches led to orders for land resumption being issued without adequately addressing a crucial and relevant issue.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner and confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner, directing resumption of the subject land, cannot be legally

sustained. Accordingly, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside.

¶6For the foregoing reasons, the orders of the Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner are liable to be set aside.

¶7The writ of certiorari is ordered. The order dated

08.03.2017 passed by the second respondent vide Annexure-C and the order dated 17.12.2021 passed by the first respondent vide Annexure-G are quashed.

¶8Resultantly, the writ petition is allowed. On disposal of the Writ Petition, any interim order stands discharged, and any pending interlocutory applications, if any, are disposed of. Sd/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27