Absolute bar on transfer of granted land without prior permission prevails beyond the non-alienation period.

Section 4(2) of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 was applied as an overriding statutory bar on transfer of granted land without prior Government permission, and that requirement was held to continue even after expiry of the grant's non-alienation period under the grant rules. The Court also held that the challenge to the sale transactions was not defeated by delay, laches, or alleged suppression, because the proceedings served the protective object of the statute and the facts did not justify leaving the transfers undisturbed. The impugned transactions were therefore treated as void for want of valid prior permission, and the orders restoring the lands were sustained.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a transfer of granted land made after the expiry of the fifteen-year non-alienation period could still be invalidated for want of previous permission under Section 4(2) of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978. (ii) Whether the challenge to the transfer was barred by delay, laches, or the appellant's suppression of material facts.

Issue (i): Whether a transfer of granted land made after the expiry of the fifteen-year non-alienation period could still be invalidated for want of previous permission under Section 4(2) of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978.

Analysis: The grant conditions under Rule 9(i) of the Karnataka Land Grant Rules, 1969 imposed a period of non-alienation, and the statute subsequently introduced an independent statutory embargo on transfer of granted land without previous permission of the Government. Section 4(1) operates notwithstanding any contrary term in the grant or other law, and Section 11 gives the Act overriding effect. The earlier decision in Manchegowda was confined to the limited challenge before the Court and did not dilute the later and clearer construction of Section 4 adopted in subsequent decisions. Reading the statutory scheme as a whole, the permission requirement under Section 4(2) was not confined to the five-to-fifteen-year window in the grant rules and continued to govern transfers even after expiry of the grant period.

Conclusion: The transfer remained subject to prior permission even after fifteen years, and the appellant's challenge on this ground failed.

Issue (ii): Whether the challenge to the transfer was barred by delay, laches, or the appellant's suppression of material facts.

Analysis: The proceedings were initiated about eight years after the sale deeds, which was not treated as such an extraordinary delay as to defeat action under a protective statute enacted for the benefit of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The Court also noted that the appellant had not made full disclosure and that the alleged prior-permission documents had been found to be forged, but it declined to non-suit the appellant solely on suppression and instead decided the matter on merits. The facts and the statutory object did not justify interference with the orders setting aside the transactions.

Conclusion: The challenge was not barred by delay or laches, and suppression did not alter the result against the appellant.

Final Conclusion: The statutory prohibition on transfer was held to prevail, the impugned transactions were treated as void for want of valid prior permission, and the orders restoring the lands were sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 4(2) of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 imposes an absolute bar on transfer of granted land without previous Government permission, and that requirement is not displaced by the expiry of the grant's non-alienation period or by the grant rules.

---