Smt. Wajida Tabassum, v. The State of Karnataka

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 3880 OF 2026 (LR) BETWEEN:

1. SMT. WAJIDA TABASSUM, W/O. LATE ANEES AHAMED, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS

2. SRI. MASOOD AHMED, S/O. LATE ANEES AHAMED, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS

¶3SRI.MASTHAN AHMED AAITHIF, S/O. LATE ANEES AHAMED, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,

4. TASNEEM PIRDOS D/O. LATE ANEES AHAMED, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS

¶5SRI. MAZZ AHMED SAQHIL, S/O. LATE ANEES AHAMED, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT NO.2675, 5th CROSS, MK DK ROAD, MANDI MOHALLA, MYSORE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT - 570 021. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. H.M. MANJESH, ADVOCATE) by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka e -e2e-eeeee e e NC:(2026:KHC:10277 WP(No.(3880(of(2026 AND:

1., THE,STATE,OF,KARNATAKA, BY,ITS,PRINCIPAL,SECRETARY,,, REVENUE,DEPARTMENT,,, VIKAS,SOUDHA,,AMBEDKAR,VEEDHI,,, BENGALURU-01.,

2., THE,ASSISTANT,COMMISSIONER,, HUNASURU,SUB,DIVISION,,, HUNASURU,,, MYSORE,DISTRCT,-,571,105.,

3., THE,TAHSILDAR,, H.D.,KOTE,TALUK,,, MYSORE,DISTRICT,-,571,114., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,K.P.,YOGANNA,,AGA), , THIS, WP, IS, FILED, UNDER, ARTICLES, 226, AND, 227, OF, THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA, PRAYING, TO, QUASH, THE, IMPUGNED, ORDER, DATED, 12.07.2010, PASSED, BY, THE, ASSISTANT, COMMISSIONER,, HUNSURU, SUB, DIVISION,, HUNSURU,, RESPONDENT, NO.2, HEREIN, IN, NO.LRF, 60/09-10, VIDE,ANNEXURE-H,AND,ETC., , THIS, PETITION,, COMING, ON, FOR, PRELIMINARY, HEARING,,THIS,DAY,,ORDER,WAS,MADE,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:,

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER

Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for all the respondents.

¶2This writ petition has been filed aggrieved by the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner in proceedings bearing No.LRF.60/09-10 dated 12.07.2010 at Annexure-H.

¶3Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are the legal representatives of Sri.Anees Ahmed against whom the impugned order was passed this is a case where the impugned order of forfeiture has been passed by the Assistant Commissioner without notice to the petitioners. It is further submitted that under similar circumstances, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.7821/2021 has passed an order dated 16.08.2021 remanding the matter back to the Assistant Commissioner

for fresh consideration after affording an opportunity of hearing to the aggrieved person.

¶4Learned Additional Government Advocate points out from the impugned order that notice was indeed issued to the petitioners and in spite of notice having been issued, the petitioners did not appear before the Assistant Commissioner.

¶5Admittedly, as on the date of the Karnataka Land Reforms (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020, proceedings were pending before any Court/authority.

¶6This Court had several occasions to consider such cases, where writ petitions are filed long after the provisions contained in Sections 79A, 79B and 79C were omitted from the statute book in terms of the Karnataka Land Reforms (Second Amendment) Act, 2020. It is the consistent opinion of this Court that if at any rate, the Assistant Commissioner, after forfeiting the land has not disposed of the same in accordance with law then the

benefit of the saving clause contained in Section 12 of the Amending Act is required to be given to such petitioners. The Assistant Commissioner is therefore, required to ascertain, whether the declared excess lands or forfeited lands still remain with the State Government or has been granted to third parties. If the lands have been granted to third party, then sub-section(1) of Section 12 of the amending Act will apply to say that the proceedings have reached finality. Or otherwise, sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Amending Act will apply and all further proceedings shall be declared as abated by the Assistant Commissioner.

¶7Having considered the submission of the learned Counsels and on perusing the judgment of the co-ordinate Bench in W.P.No.7821/2021, this Court finds that facts and circumstances in both these matters are quite similar and therefore, the benefit of the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench should also enure to the petitioners herein.

¶8Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER

i) The writ petition is disposed of.

ii) The matter is remanded back to the respondent-Assistant Commissioner to consider the case of the petitioners including the consequences of the subsequent amendment brought to the provisions of Sections 79-A and 79-B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act in Karnataka Amendment No.56 of 2020.

iii) If revenue entries have been altered pursuant to the impugned order dated

12.07.2010, the same shall be restored in favour of the petitioners.

iv) The petitioner shall appear before the respondent-Assistant Commissioner on

12.03.2026, without waiting for further notice from the Assistant Commissioner. Ordered accordingly.

Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE GPG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28