SMT. CHANNAMMA, vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62177
WP No. 31123 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010660402024







IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

TH
DATED THIS THE 11 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M

WRIT PETITION NO. 31123 OF 2024 (SC/ST)


BETWEEN:

1. SMT. CHANNAMMA,
W/O. LATE BASAVALINGAPPA,
AGED 72 YEARS,

2. SMT. CHANDRAKALA,
W/O. G.V.RAVEESH,
AGED 42 YEARS,

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT
GORAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE,
KASABA HOBLI, TIPTUR TALUK,
TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572201.
…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. M.B.CHANDRACHOODA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
M.S. BUILDING,
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU - 560001.

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT,
TUMAKURU-572 101.











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

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62177
WP No. 31123 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010660402024



3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
TIPTUR SUB DIVISION,
TIPTUR - 572201,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT.

4. SRI. R.RANGASWAMY,
S/O. LATE RANGAIAH,
AGED MAJOR,
R/AT AT GORAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE,
KASABA HOBLI, TIPTUR TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572201.
…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3;
SRI. H.P.MALLEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R4-ABSENT)

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.M.B.Chandrachooda, counsel for the petitioners
and Smt.Savithramma, Additional Government Advocate
for respondent Nos.1 to 3 appeared in person.
There is no representation on behalf of counsel for
respondent No.4.

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62177
WP No. 31123 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010660402024



Counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are not pressing prayer No.ii.
The oral submission regarding non pressing of prayer
No.ii is placed on record.
2. This petition is filed seeking following reliefs:

(i) Quash the Order dated 22/10/2024 passed
in case No. PTCL No.8/2022 and PTCL
No.27/2022 on the file of the Deputy
Commissioner, Tumakuru District,
Tumakuru vide Annexure-J, by issue of writ
of certiorari.
(ii) Quash the Act No.30/2023, the Karnataka
Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes
(PTCL) Act, 1978, Amendment Act,
20/2023 ultravires, to the Constitution of
India, declaring the same as void vide
Annexure-K,
(iii) Issue any appropriate writ, order or
direction as deemed fit in the
circumstances of the case.

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62177
WP No. 31123 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010660402024



3. In PTCL writ petitions, the orders passed by the
Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner are
ordinarily challenged before this Court. The Court has
frequently observed discrepancies in the names of the
original grantees, the dates of grant and alienation, and
the survey numbers mentioned in the impugned orders.
Accordingly, for the sake of convenience and to avoid
unnecessary repetition, the parties are referred to as the
“original grantee”, and the relevant years of grant and
alienation are used instead of reproducing the names,
dates, and survey numbers in each case.
4. Counsel for the respective parties advanced
several contentions.
Additional Government Advocate justified the action
on the part of the Deputy Commissioner and submits that
the petition lack merits and it may be dismissed.
5. The Court heard the arguments and carefully
perused the papers.

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62177
WP No. 31123 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010660402024



6. The issue involved in the present case is
confined to the resumption proceedings. The land in
question was granted in the year 1944, and the first
alienation took place in the year 1993. However, the
resumption proceedings were initiated only in the year
2016, after a lapse of nearly 23 years from the date of the
first alienation.
The Assistant Commissioner rejected the petition
seeking resumption of the land. In the appeal preferred
against the said order, the Deputy Commissioner partly
allowed the appeal and remanded the matter to the
Assistant Commissioner for fresh consideration. While the
Assistant Commissioner was justified in rejecting the
claim, the Deputy Commissioner, while passing the order
of remand, failed to take into consideration the inordinate
delay of nearly 23 years in initiating the resumption
proceedings.

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62177
WP No. 31123 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010660402024



The Deputy Commissioner ought to have considered
the question of delay and laches, particularly the
contention of the petitioners that the proceedings were
initiated after an unreasonable and unexplained lapse of
time. The authority was required to examine whether the
resumption proceedings could be entertained after such a
considerable delay, especially when the rights in respect of
the land had been dealt with under the registered sale
deed executed in the year 1993.
The failure of the Deputy Commissioner to consider
the aspect of delay and laches, which is a material and
relevant consideration in the present case, has resulted in
an order of remand without addressing a crucial issue
arising for consideration. Therefore, the order passed by
the Deputy Commissioner cannot be sustained and
warrants interference by this Court.
The Division Bench clarified that laches should be
regarded as the primary requirement when resuming

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62177
WP No. 31123 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010660402024



lands. It also held that if restoration action is filed after a
significant delay, it could be barred by laches.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court
is of the considered view that the order passed by the
Deputy Commissioner, cannot be legally sustained.
Accordingly, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.
7. For the foregoing reasons, the order of the
Deputy Commissioner is liable to be set aside.
8. The writ of certiorari is ordered. The order
dated 22.10.2024 passed by the Deputy Commissioner
vide Annexure-J is quashed. As this Court has quashed the
order, the authority concerned is hereby directed to
restore the petitioners' name in the subject land in the
revenue records.
allowed

9. Resultantly, the writ petition is .

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62177
WP No. 31123 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010660402024



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


SS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30