Sri Siddarth Bagrecha v. The State of Karnataka

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 17367 OF 2025 (LR)

BETWEEN:

SRI SIDDARTH BAGRECHA S/O MUKESH BAGRECHA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/A NO-55, LALBAGH ROAD, BANGALORE-560 027. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRAVEEN HEGDE., ADVOCATE) AND:

¶1THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MS BUILDING, BANGALORE 560 001.

¶2THE ASST. COMMISSIONER. KOLLEGALA SUB DIVISION, KOLLEGALA, CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT-571440.

¶3THE TAHSILDAR. HANURU, KOLLEGALA. CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT-571440. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.S.R.KHAMROZ KHAN., AGA FOR R1 TO R3)

by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF TH CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, QUASHING THE ORDERS OF THE HONBLE 2ND RESPONDENT IN LRF (79A-79B) CR 05/2017-18 DATED 25-02-2020 AS PER ANNEXURE-B, AS PER ANNEXURE-B 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

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of forfeiture passed by the Assistant Commissioner dated 25.02.2020, invoking the provisions of Section 83 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, for violation of the provisions contained in Section 79A and 79B of the Act.

¶2Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that this is a case where the impugned order of forfeiture has been passed by the Assistant Commissioner without notice to the petitioner. 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.

¶3Learned Additional Government Advocate points out from the impugned order that notice was indeed issued to the petitioner and in spite of notice having been issued, the petitioner did not appear before the Assistant Commissioner.

¶4Admittedly, as on the date of the Karnataka Land Reforms (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020, no proceedings were pending before any court/authority.

¶5This 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.

¶6Having considered the submissions 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 petitioner herein.

¶7Accordingly, 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 petitioner 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

25.02.2020, the same shall be restored in favour of the petitioner.

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

11.05.2026, without waiting for further notice from the Assistant Commissioner.

Ordered accordingly.

¶8Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of.

Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE

JT/- CT: JL