SRI N NAGARAJU vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58801
WP No. 17787 of 2018

CNR: KAHC010118252018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

TH
DATED THIS THE 16 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M

WRIT PETITION NO. 17787 OF 2018 (SC/ST)

BETWEEN:

SRI N NAGARAJU
S/O LATE NARASIMHAIAH
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS
R/AT ULLURUPETE
SHIDHLAGHATTA TOWN
CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NARASIMHARAJU, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
VIKASA SOUDHA
BENGALURU

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
TUMAKURU DISTRICT
TUMAKURU

3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
MADHUGIRI SUB DIVISION
MADHUGIRI
TUMAKURU DISTRICT

4. SRI KARIYAPPA
S/O LATE NARASAPPA
SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS

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

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58801
WP No. 17787 of 2018

CNR: KAHC010118252018

4(A) SMT. LAKSHMAMMA,
D/O. LATE KARIYANNA,
W/O. CHIKKANNA,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
R/AT SIDADARAGALLU VILLAGE,
MADHUGIRI TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT

4(B) SMT. MUDRANGAMMA,
W/O. KADRAPPA,
D/O. LATE KARIYANNA,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
R/AT BURUKA BETTA,
MADGISIRA TALUK,
ANANTHAPURA DISTRICT,
ANDHRA PRADESH.

4(C) SMT. SIDDAGANGAMMA,
D/O. LATE KARIYANNA,
W/O. KADRAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
R/AT NO.6 SIDADARAGALLU VILLAGE,
MADHUGIRI TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT.

4(D) SMT. MANJAMMA,
SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS

4(D)(1) CHENNAMMA,
D/O. GOVINDAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
R/AT NO.6-43, M.RAYAPURAM,
ANANTHAPURA,
ANDHRA PRADESH-515271.

4(D)(2) SRI AJAY KUMAR,
S/O. GOVINDAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS,
R/AT NO.6-43, M.RAYAPURAM,
RAYAPURAM DISTRICT,

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58801
WP No. 17787 of 2018

CNR: KAHC010118252018

ANANTHAPURA,
ANDHRA PRADESH-515271

4(D)(3) THIMMOJAMMA,
C/O. MANJUNATHA,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
R/AT SIRA TALUK, KALLAHALLI,
TUMAKURU-572113.

4(D)(4) SMT. RANGALAKSHMAMMA,
W/O. H.N.SHIVAKUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
R/AT HULIGERE KASABA HOBLI,
SIRA TALUK, MADALUR,
TUMAKURU-572137.

4(D)(5) SMT. RENUKA G.,
W/O. ERANNA,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
R/AT NO.1-101, SHAMKARAGALLU,
GUBIDANDA RALLAHALLI,
ANANTHAPURAM,
ANDHRA PRADESH-515305.

5. SRI NAGARAJU
S/O LATE HANUMANTHAIAH
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
RESIDING AT BASAVAPATNA,
CHENNAGIRI TALUK
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577001.

6. SMT MUDDHAMMA
W/O LATE HANUMANTHAIAH
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS

DEAD AND ALSO TREATED
RESPONDENT NO.5 AS
LRS OF RESPONDENT NO.6

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58801
WP No. 17787 of 2018

CNR: KAHC010118252018

7. SRI RANGAPPA
S/O LATE KAMANNA
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
R/AT BASAVANAHALLI VILLAGE
DODDERI HOBLI,
MADHUGIRI TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3;
SRI. H.V.HARISH, ADVOCATE FOR
R4(A TO C) AND R4(D)(1-5);
R5 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED;
VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 17.09.2021
R6 DIED LEAVING BEHIND R5 AS LR;
VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 17.09.2021,
NOTICE TO R7 IS DISPENSED WITH)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 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.Narasimharaju., counsel for petitioner,
Smt.Savithramma., Additional Government Advocate for
respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri.H.V.Harish., counsel for
respondent Nos.4(a) to 4(c) and 4(d)(1) to 4(d)(5)
appeared in person.

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58801
WP No. 17787 of 2018

CNR: KAHC010118252018

In PTCL writ petitions, the orders passed by the
Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner are
ordinarily called into question. This Court has frequently
noticed discrepancies in the names of the original grantees
and the dates of grant and alienation recorded in the
impugned orders. Hence, for the sake of convenience, this
Court refers to the parties as the “original grantee” and
the relevant years of grant and alienation, instead of
reproducing the names and dates.
2. This petition is filed seeking following reliefs:

a) Call for the records pending on the file of
3rd respondent in PTCL SR 7/2011-12 and
on perusal.
b) Issue Writ of certiorari by set-asiding the
order of the 2nd respondent dated 27-
10.2017 passed in PTCL No.9/2014-15 as
per Annexure-"A" and the order of the 3rd
respondent dated 19-11-2014 in PTCL SR
No.7/2011-12 as per Annexure - "B" and
consequently reject the petition filed by
the 4th respondent in PTCL SR 7/2011-12

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58801
WP No. 17787 of 2018

CNR: KAHC010118252018

pending on the file of the 3rd respondent
in respect of property bearing Sy.No.49
New No.206 and 207 measuring 3 acres
20 guntas situated at Badavanahalli
Village, Dodderi Hobli, Madhugiri Taluk,
Tumkur District.
c) Grant such other relief as this Hon'ble
Court deems fit to grant under the
circumstance of the case in the interest of
justice and equity.
3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several
contentions.
Counsel for the petitioner, in the course of his
submissions, strenuously contends that the land in
question was granted in 1949, the first alienation took
place in 1966, and the petitioner purchased the property
in 2008. However, the resumption proceedings were
initiated only in 2011–12, after a lapse of nearly 45 years
from the first alienation. He submits that the Deputy
Commissioner erred in remanding the matter without
taking into consideration the inordinate delay and laches in

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58801
WP No. 17787 of 2018

CNR: KAHC010118252018

initiating the resumption proceedings. Accordingly, he
contends that the Deputy Commissioner ought to have
considered the aspect of laches and allowed the appeal.
On these grounds, he prays that the writ petition be
allowed.
Per contra, counsel appearing for respondent Nos.
4(a) to 4(c) and 4(d)(1) to 4(d)(5) submits that the
Assistant Commissioner had allowed the claim and that
the Deputy Commissioner, upon considering the relevant
points for determination, has rightly remanded the matter
for fresh consideration. Hence, he contends that the order
passed by the Deputy Commissioner does not warrant
interference and prays for dismissal of the writ petition.
The Additional Government Advocate submits that
appropriate orders may be passed.
4. Heard the counsel for the parties and perused
the records.

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58801
WP No. 17787 of 2018

CNR: KAHC010118252018

5. Suffice it to note that the land in question was
granted in 1949, the first alienation took place in 1966,
and the subsequent alienation took place in 2008.
Admittedly, the resumption proceedings were initiated in
2011-12, after a lapse of approximately 45 years from the
first alienation.
A perusal of the order passed by the Assistant
Commissioner indicates that the issue of delay and laches
has not been considered. The Deputy Commissioner,
having regard to the points for consideration, has
remanded the matter to the Assistant Commissioner. This
Court finds no infirmity in the order of remand.
6. However, having regard to the submissions
made by counsel for the petitioner and the specific
contention regarding delay and laches in initiating the
resumption proceedings, this Court deems it appropriate
to direct the Assistant Commissioner to record a specific
finding on the said issue, in addition to considering the

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58801
WP No. 17787 of 2018

CNR: KAHC010118252018

other points for which the matter has been remanded by
the Deputy Commissioner.
7. In view of the remand ordered by the Deputy
Commissioner, the Assistant Commissioner is directed to
consider the matter afresh, address the issue of delay and
laches as well as the other relevant issues, and dispose of
the proceedings within three months from the receipt of a
certified copy of this order.
8. With the above observations and directions, the
writ petition stands disposed of . All contentions of the
respective parties are kept open.

Sd/-
(JYOTI M)
JUDGE

AM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28