Karnataka HC Quashes Land Resumption After PTCL Proceedings Began Nearly 60 Years After Sale, Orders Petitioner’s Name Restored In Revenue Records

The land was granted in 1951–52 and first alienated in 1958.

Resumption proceedings were initiated before the Assistant Commissioner in 2018. The Assistant Commissioner rejected the claim, but the Deputy Commissioner set aside that decision and directed resumption. The petitioner challenged the Deputy Commissioner’s order dated 25 September 2025, arguing that the proceedings were initiated after an unreasonable delay.

The Court applied the principle that delay and laches are relevant to proceedings for restoration or resumption of granted land under the PTCL Act.

It noted the Division Bench’s clarification that laches should be treated as a primary consideration and that restoration action initiated after a significant delay may be barred by laches.

The judgment does not identify the Division Bench decision by name or cite a specific statutory provision.

The Court found that the Deputy Commissioner had set aside the Assistant Commissioner’s rejection without addressing the nearly 60-year interval since the 1958 sale or the approximately 40 years since the PTCL Act came into force.

Because the rights in the land had been settled by the sale deed, the Deputy Commissioner was required to assess whether resumption proceedings could properly proceed after such delay.

The failure to consider delay and laches meant the resumption order could not be sustained.

It also directed the concerned authority to restore the petitioner’s name in the revenue records relating to the subject land.