Karnataka High Court
Sri.Mohan Kumar vs The Deputy Commissioner on 3 July, 2019
Author: K.N.Phaneendra
Bench: K.N.Phaneendra
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JULY 2019
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA
W.P.No.205115/2018
C/W
W.P.Nos.203840/2018 & Nos.204517-519/2018,
203841/2018 & No.204520/2018 (KLR-CON)
W.P.No.205115/2018
Between:
Sri Mohan Kumar
S/o Ghanteppa
Aged about 63 years
R/o Kanadal
Tq. & Dist: Kalaburagi
... Petitioner
(By Smt. Ratna N.Shivayogimath, Advocate)
And:
The Deputy Commissioner
Kalaburagi
Dist: Kalaburagi-585 101
... Respondent
(By Smt.Arati Patil, HCGP)
2
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of
Constitution of India praying to issue a writ or direction or
order writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the
endorsement dated nil.5.2018 in No.Kandaya/Bhumi/Kraye
/Grameena/139/2015-16 issued by the respondent vide
Annexure-Z; issue a writ or direction or order writ in the
nature of mandamus, directing the respondent to collect the
fee in respect of the lands in question and consequently
issue the certificate of conversion, in respect of Sy.No.261/3
measuring 7 acres 32 guntas, situated at Khandal village,
Tq. & Dist. Kalaburagi.
W.P.NOS.203840/2018 & Nos.204517-519/2018,
Between:
Sri Mohan Kumar
S/o Ghanteppa
Aged about 63 years
R/o Kanadal
Tq. & Dist: Kalaburagi
... Petitioner
(By Smt. Ratna N.Shivayogimath, Advocate)
And:
The Deputy Commissioner
Kalaburagi
Dist: Kalaburagi-585 101
... Respondent
(By Smt.Arati Patil, HCGP)
These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 & 227
of Constitution of India praying to issue a writ or direction or
order writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the
endorsement dated nil.5.2018 in No.Kandaya/Bhumi/
Kraye/Grameena/138/2015-16 issued by the respondent
3
vide Annexure-AC; issue a writ or direction or order writ in
the nature of mandamus, directing the respondent to collect
the fee in respect of the lands in question and consequently
issue the certificate of conversion, in respect of Sy.No.258/1
measuring 4 acres 39 guntas, Sy.No.259/1 measuring 3
acres, Sy.No.260 measuring 5 acres 15 guntas and
Sy.No.261/1 measuring 4 acre 26 guntas situated at
Khandal village, Tq. & Dist. Kalaburagi.
W.P.NOS.203841-204520/2018
Between:
Sri Mohan Kumar
S/o Ghanteppa
Aged about 63 years
R/o Kanadal
Tq. & Dist: Kalaburagi
... Petitioner
(By Smt. Ratna N. Shivayogimath, Advocate)
And:
The Deputy Commissioner
Kalaburagi
Dist: Kalaburagi-585 101
... Respondent
(By Smt.Arati Patil, HCGP)
These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 & 227
of Constitution of India praying to issue a writ or direction or
order writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the
endorsement dated nil.5.2018 in No.Kandaya/Bhumi/Kraye
/Grameena/140/2015-16 issued by the respondent vide
Annexure-AC; issue a writ or direction or order writ in the
nature of mandamus, directing the respondent to collect the
fee in respect of the lands in question and consequently
issue the certificate of conversion, in respect of Sy.No.258/3
4
measuring 4 acres 24 guntas and Sy.No.259/3 measuring 4
acres 24 guntas situated at Khandal village, Tq. & Dist.
Kalaburagi.
These petitions coming on for preliminary hearing this
day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader. In all the above said petitions the following prayers have been sought:
In WP No.205115/2018
Issue a writ or direction or order in the nature of certiorari, quashing the endorsement dated nil.5.2018 in No.Kandaya/Bhumi/Kraye /Grameena/139/2015-16 issued by the respondent vide Annexure-Z; Issue a writ or direction or order writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondent to collect the fee in respect of the lands in question and consequently issue the certificate of conversion, in respect of Sy.No.261/3 measuring 7 acres 32 guntas, situated at Khandal village, Tq. & Dist. Kalaburagi.
W.P.Nos.203840/2018 & Nos.204517-519/2018 Issue a writ or direction or order writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the endorsement dated nil.5.2018 in No.Kandaya/Bhumi/Kraye 5 /Grameena/138/2015-16 issued by the respondent vide Annexure-AC; Issue a writ or direction or order writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondent to collect the fee in respect of the lands in question and consequently issue the certificate of conversion, in respect of Sy.No.258/1 measuring 4 acres 39 guntas, Sy.No.259/1 measuring 3 acres, Sy.No.260 measuring 5 acres 15 guntas and Sy.No.261/1 measuring 4 acres 26 guntas situated at Khandal village, Tq. & Dist. Kalaburagi.
W.P.Nos.203841-204520/2018 Issue a writ or direction or order writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the endorsement dated nil.5.2018 in No.Kandaya/Bhumi/Kraye /Grameena/140/2015-16 issued by the respondent vide Annexure-AC; Issue a writ or direction or order writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondent to collect the fee in respect of the lands in question and consequently issue the certificate of conversion, in respect of Sy.No.258/3 measuring 4 acres 24 guntas and Sy.No.259/3 measuring 4 acres 24 guntas situated at Khandal village, Tq. & Dist. Kalaburagi.
2. In the above said writ petitions, the petitioner has made an application seeking, conversion of lands bearing Sy.No. 261/3 measuring 7 acres 32 guntas; Sy.No.258/1 measuring 4 acres 39 guntas, Sy.No.259/1 measuring 3 acres, Sy.No.260, measuring 6 5 acres 15 guntas and Sy.No.261/1, measuring 4 acres 26 guntas and also for Sy.No.258/3 measuring 4 acres 24 guntas and Sy.No.259/3 measuring 4 acres 24 guntas situated at Khandal village, Tq. and Dist:
Kalaburagi. It is contended by the petitioner that, his father has made an application for conversion of the said lands under section 95(5) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act on 09.09.2015 as per Annexure-K. Inspite of lapse of 4 months, no orders have been passed.
Therefore, when no order has been passed, it is deemed conversion order as per said provisions. In spite of his repeated requests and demands, the respondent Deputy Commissioner has not been processing the papers by issuing certificate of conversion in respect of the said lands. On the other hand, the Deputy Commissioner has issued an endorsement dated nil.05.2018 as per Annexure-Z stating that the petitioner has not submitted the required documents for the purpose of 7 processing his application for conversion of the lands.
Therefore, his application was closed.
3. Learned High Court Government Pleader brought to the notice of this Court that, underneath the digital signature in Annexure-Z by the competent authority, the date is mentioned. On examination of Annexure-Z, it appears that the said endorsement was digitally signed on 01.06.2018. Therefore, it goes without saying that though the application was filed in the year 2015, even considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the said application was received under Sakaal scheme on 21.11.2015 but the endorsement which is impugned shows that, it was issued in the year 2018. Though in another writ petition No.203840/2018 and Nos.204517-
519/2018, endorsement was issued on 22.03.2016 but the said endorsement has also exceeded 4 months in all as stipulated in the said provision. As could be seen the 8 application for conversion of the lands though filed in the year 2015 before completion of 4 months, no endorsement or order was issued by the Deputy Commissioner.
4. The provisions of section 95 (5) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act clearly indicates that:
"If the Deputy Commissioner fails to inform the applicant of his decision on the application made under sub section 2, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the application the permission applied for shall be deemed to have been granted."
5. In view of the above said provisions, it is a deemed conversion order in favour of the petitioner's father during his life time. Therefore, endorsement issued much after long time dated 01.06.2018 is infact, devoid of consideration and the same is liable to be quashed. Consequently, relief is also in my opinion has to be granted by directing the respondent to collect the 9 fee in respect of the land in question and by issuing the certificate of conversion in respect of the lands which are deemed to have been converted according to the law.
6. Though learned High Court Government Pleader submitted that Deputy Commissioner will consider the representation, in accordance with law, if afresh is given along with sufficient documents for consideration but the said submission in my opinion, is devoid of merits and such a direction cannot be given to the petitioner who has already acquired the conversion order according to law under section 95 (5) of the said Act.
7. In this context, it is worth to refer the decision of this Court reported in ILR 1994 Karnataka 2958, between Rudraswamy vs. Deputy Commissioner wherein this Court has observed that:
"Under sub-section (5) of the 95, it has been provided that if the Deputy 10 Commissioner fails to inform the applicant of his decision on the application made under Sub-section (2) within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the application, the permission shall be deemed to have been granted. It is well settled principle of law and Rule of interpretation that a deeming provision has to be given its full effect. Then it means that the permission is deemed to have been granted on the expiry of the period as aforesaid. It shall be deemed that the Deputy Commissioner has granted permission and once this deeming clause applies, the jurisdiction of the authority of the Deputy Commissioner to reject the application ceases and gets exhausted."
8. Having said so, this Court allowed the writ petition and given such direction as prayed in that writ petition.
9. It is submitted by the learned High Court Government Pleader that the petitioner's father has actually filed the said representation before the Deputy 11 Commissioner and he died during the pendency of the said application. Therefore, the said application lapsed due to the death of the deceased applicant. The said fact has not been intimated to the Deputy Commissioner in time. In this context, the Court has directed the petitioner to produce the death certificate of his father. It is seen that the deceased died on 05.02.2016 i.e. after lapse of the said statutory period prescribed under section 95 (5) of the Act. Therefore, whatever, the right vested with the father of the petitioner is automatically continued to the benefit of the petitioner as his legal representative. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for the certificate of conversion as prayed in the writ petitions.
10. Under the above said circumstances, the following order is passed:
12
ORDER Writ petitions are allowed. Consequently order passed by the Deputy Commissioner by way of endorsements as per Annexures-AC and Z are hereby quashed. A direction is issued to the respondent to collect the fee in respect of the said lands in question and consequently issue certificate of conversion in respect of the lands as prayed in the writ petitions. The said exercise has to be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE VNR