Karnataka HC Quashes PTCL Resumption Of Converted Sites, Citing 12-Year Gap After 1995 Sale

The land was granted in 1978. Respondent No. 3 sold it to respondent No. 4 in 1995; respondent No. 4 obtained conversion permission in 1998, after which sites were formed and sold to the petitioners between 2000 and 2005.

PTCL Act resumption proceedings were initiated in 2007. The Assistant Commissioner ordered resumption on 28 July 2008, and the Deputy Commissioner upheld that order on 25 January 2024. The petitioners challenged both orders by writ petition.

The Court applied the PTCL Act, including Section 4(2), and relied on the principles stated in W.P. No. 60483/2014: once land is diverted or converted, it ceases to be “granted land” for purposes of the Act, and Section 4(2) permission is not required for land so converted.

The Court also relied on the principle that delay and laches are material considerations in resumption proceedings and that restoration action brought after significant delay may be barred by laches.

The land had been sold in 1995, converted in 1998, and developed into sites before the resumption proceedings began in 2007. Applying the cited rule on converted land, the Court held that the PTCL Act did not apply to the facts presented.

It also found that the Assistant Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner had failed to address the approximately 12-year interval between alienation and commencement of proceedings, or the resulting issue of laches, despite the intervening changes in the land and ownership. The orders therefore rested on an erroneous application of the Act and did not adequately consider a relevant issue.

It directed the concerned authority to mutate or restore the petitioners’ names in the revenue records relating to the subject land.