Karnataka High Court
Sri.Mohammed Sajeed Ladle vs The Deputy Commissioner on 29 January, 2020
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.204676/2019 (KLR-CON)
Between:
Sri Mohammed Sajeed Ladle,
S/o Khaja Moinuddin,
Aged about 49 years,
R/o H.No.7-1202/123/1/42/43,
Bagadad Colony, Islamabad Colony,
Kapanoor, Kalaburagi.
... Petitioner
(By Smt Ratna N.Shivayogimath, Advocate)
AND:
The Deputy Commissioner,
Kalaburagi,
Dist: Kalaburagi 585 101.
... Respondent
(By Smt Anuradha Desai Government Advocate)
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, praying to;
(a) Issue a writ or direction or order writ in the nature of
mandamus, directing the respondent to collect the conversion fees
in respect of land bearing Sy.No. 50/4 measuring 07 acres 32
guntas, situated at Udnoor village, Tq. & Dist. Kalaburagi and
consequently issue a certificate of conversion.
(b) Issue a writ or direction or order writ in the nature of
mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the
representation dated 10.09.2019 vide Annexure-H and R as under
section 95(5) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, in the
interest of justice and equity.
2
This petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day,
the Court made the following:-
ORDER
The learned Government Advocate files statement of objections and the same is taken on record.
2. The top noted writ petition is filed seeking direction against the respondent to collect conversion fees in respect of land bearing Sy.No. 50/4 measuring 07 acres 32 guntas situated at Udnoor, Tq. & Dist. Kalaburagi.
3. The facts leading to this case are that the petitioner is the owner of land bearing Sy.No. 50/4 measuring 07 acres 32 guntas situated at Udnoor, Tq. & Dist. Kalaburagi. Petition land is a barren land and is not cultivable. Hence, the petitioner applied for conversion of said land into non-agricultural purpose and accordingly application for conversion was filed on 23.05.2000 along with documents like no arrears 3 certificate issued by the Tahasildar, Kalaburagi and the application was received by the authority on the same day i.e., 23.05.2000.
4. The petitioner has also furnished copy of report of Tahasildar, Gulbarga as per Annexure-B wherein the Tahasildar has recommended for conversion into non agricultural residential purpose. The petitioner has also furnished copy of No objection certificate issued by Commissioner, Corporation of City of Gulbarga as per Annexure-C which is dated 11.07.2000. The petitioner has also furnished copy of letter dated 18.07.2000 issued by Joint Director, District Industries Center, Gulbarga who has given No objection for converting the petitioner's land. The Assistant Commissioner, Gulbarga has also opined vide his letter dated 24.07.2000 that there are no proposals for any of acquisitions.
4
5. The respondent having received the application seeking conversion along with all requisite documents, has not taken action as contemplated under section 95 of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. The counsel for the petitioner would submit that though the application was filed in the year 2000, the Deputy Commissioner has failed to issue any endorsement or order as contemplated under section 95(3) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. In that view of the matter, counsel for the petitioner placeing reliance on provisions of Section 95(5) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act would submit to this Court that since respondent/Deputy Commissioner has failed 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 application, the permission applied shall be deemed to have been granted.
5
6. Having perused Section 95(5) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, this Court is of the view that the Deputy Commissioner on receipt of application, is required to act upon the said application within four months as contemplated under section 95(3) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. If he fails to act upon the application, then under sub-section 5 of section 95 of the Act, which mandates that on account of Deputy Commissioner failing 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 application, the permission applied for, shall be deemed to have been granted. The provisions makes it very explicit deemed conversion will operate unless the said order is communicated within a period of four months to the applicant. In that view of the matter, in the present case on hand, the petitioner has submitted his application with all requisite documents and also No objections from competent authorities 6 seeking conversion and the competent authorities have opined that the petitioner is entitled for conversion and in that view of the matter, on account of inaction on the part of respondent/Deputy Commissioner deemed provision will come into play and hence the respondent/Deputy Commissioner has to accept the conversion fees and penalty that would be imposed in accordance with law. In that view of the matter the writ petition is allowed. The respondent/Deputy Commissioner is directed to accept the conversion fee and issue conversion certificate within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
SD/-
JUDGE *MK