Karnataka High Court
Smt. S Nagaratna W/O S Nagaraj vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 May, 2023
Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
WP No. 105101 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MAY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO. 105101 OF 2022 (KLR-CON)
BETWEEN:
SMT. S. NAGARATNA W/O S. NAGARAJ
AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. 21ST WARD, BALLARI ROAD,
URAMMA BAYALU, HOSAPETE,
TQ: HOSAPETE, DIST: VIJAYANAGAR,
PIN-583201.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. G I GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY ITS SECRETARY TO REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
Digitally signed VIDHANA VEEDHI,
by RAKESH S
HARIHAR BENGALURU-1.
Location: High
RAKESH Court of
S Karnataka,
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
Dharwad
HARIHAR Date:
2023.06.01 VIJAYANAGAR DISTRICT,
11:27:41
+0530 HOSAPETE.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VINAYAK S KULKARNI, AGA FOR R1 & R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 13.6.2022 BEARING
NO.NIL ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 PRODUCED AS
ANNEXURE-D BY ISSUE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY
OTHER SUITABLE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTIONS & ETC.
-2-
WP No. 105101 of 2022
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. The petitioner herein claiming to be the absolute owner of the land bearing Sy.No.97/5 measuring 84 cents situated at Sankalapur village, Hosapete taluk, Vijayanagar district has approached this Court in the instant writ petition with the prayer to quash the impugned endorsement dated 13.06.2022 bearing No.Nil issued by the 2nd respondent vide Annexure-D and to further issue writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to accept conversion fees, if any and issue conversion order in respect of the land in question.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials available on record.
3. The application filed by the petitioner for conversion of the land in question from agricultural purpose to non-agricultural purpose has been rejected by the 2nd respondent-Deputy Commissioner vide -3- WP No. 105101 of 2022 endorsement order dated 13.06.2022 vide Annexure-D based on the report said to have been submitted by the Hosapete Urban Development Authority (for short, 'HUDA'). Challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no reasons have been assigned by the Deputy Commissioner to reject the application of the petitioner except stating that the application is rejected on the basis of the report submitted by HUDA. He submits that the land in question is situated within the limits of the City Municipal Council, Hosapete (for short, 'CMC') and therefore in view of Section 95(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short, 'the Act of 1964'), the petitioner is not required to obtain any separate order of conversion. In support of his argument, he has relied upon the order passed by this Court in WP No.102659/2021 disposed of on 26.08.2021.
-4-WP No. 105101 of 2022
5. Learned AGA has argued in support of the impugned order and has prayed to dismiss the writ petition.
6. The material on record would go to show that the land in question is situated within the limits of CMC and endorsement to the said effect has been issued by the Commissioner of CMC vide Annexure-B. The Deputy Commissioner has rejected the application of the petitioner without assigning any reason and in the impugned endorsement it is stated that the application is rejected on the basis of the report submitted by HUDA. Since the land in question comes within the limits of CMC, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in view of proviso to Section 95(2) of the Act of 1964, the permission for conversion in respect of the land in question deem to have been granted. In almost identical circumstances in WP No.102659/2021, this Court in paragraph 6 has observed as follows:
-5-WP No. 105101 of 2022
"6. Be that as it may, since the land now comes within the limits of the City Municipal Council, Hosapete, having regard to the orders relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is very clear that there is no necessity for the petitioner to seek a separate conversion order in respect of the land in question. Furthermore, proviso to Section 95(2) of the Act of 1964 also states that, in case of any agricultural land, which falls within the local planning area for which the master plan has been duly published, the permission for conversion in respect of the said land is deemed to have been granted, subject to payment of fine prescribed under Section 95(7) of the Act of 1964".
7. Under these circumstances, even in the present writ petition it is to be held that the petitioner is not required to obtain a separate order of conversion from the Deputy Commissioner in respect of the land in question. Accordingly the following:
ORDER Writ petition is allowed.-6- WP No. 105101 of 2022
The impugned endorsement at Annexure-D dated 13.06.2022 issued by the 2nd respondent is quashed.
The petitioner is declared to have deemed conversion in respect of the land bearing Sy.No.97/5 measuring 84 cents situated at Sankalapur village of Hosapete taluk, district Vijayanagar and it is made clear that the petitioner is not required to obtain separate conversion order. However the petitioner is liable to pay fine as prescribed under Section 95(7) of the Act of 1964 to the competent authority and proper demand may be placed in view of such fine which shall be complied by the petitioner.
Sd/-
JUDGE Kgk/Ct:Bck List No.: 1 Sl No.: 54