Karnataka High Court
Sri.A. Krishnaraju vs State Of Karnataka on 1 December, 2025
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16901
WP No. 105433 of 2016
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION NO. 105433 OF 2016 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI. A. KRISHNARAJU
S/O LATE A.ANANTHARAJU
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
R/AT NO.173, 2ND WARD,
JANATHA FLAT, HAMPI, HOSPET,
BALLARI.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SRINIVAS B. NAIK, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
TO GOVERNMENT KANNADA AND
CULTURE DEPARTMENT,
VIDHANASOUDHA,
BANGALURU.
Digitally signed by 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
VISHAL NINGAPPA
PATTIHAL BELLARY DISTRICT
Location: High
Court of Karnataka, BALLARI.
Dharwad Bench,
Dharwad
3. THE HAMPI WORLD HERITAGE
AREA MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY,
HAMPI, HOSPET TALUK,
BALLARI DISTRICT.
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
4. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA
HAMPI, HOSPET TALUK,
BALLARI DISTRICT.
REPRESENTED BY ITS
ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDING ARCHAELOGIST
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16901
WP No. 105433 of 2016
HC-KAR
5. DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY,
MUSEUMS AND HERITAGE,
OPP. KAMAL MAHAL,
HAMPI-KAMALAPUR,
HOSPET TALUK,
BALLARI DISTRICT.
REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY DIRECTOR.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, AGA;
SRI. PRASHANT F. GOUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
SRI. M.B KANAVI, CGSC FOR R4 AND R5)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO:
i) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT, ORDER
OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE ENDORSEMENT BEARING
NO.ºÀ«¥À¥À椥Áæ/ºÉÆ 22/02/2014-15/114 DATED 30.04.2015
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT (ANNEXURE - S).
ii) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT, ORDER OR
DIRECTION DIRECTING THE 2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENTS
HEREIN TO GRANT PERMISSION/NOC TO THE PETITIONER
TO CONVERT THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY FROM
AGRICULTURAL TO RESIDENTIAL USE.
iii) DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO PAY THE COSTS OF THIS
PETITION AND GRANT SUCH OTHER AND FURTHER RELIEFS
AS ARE JUST
THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN B GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16901
WP No. 105433 of 2016
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)
1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following prayer:
i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing the endorsement bearing No. 22/02/2014-15/114 dated 30.04.2015 issued by the 3rd respondent (ANNEXURE - S).
ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents herein to grant permission/NOC to the petitioner to convert the Schedule Property from agricultural to residential use.
iii) Direct the respondents to pay the costs of this petition and grant such other and further reliefs as are just.
2. The learned counsel Sri.Prashant Gaudar representing the respondent No.3 submits that the petitioner has an alternate remedy as is held by the Co-ordinate Bench. The Co-ordinate Bench in Writ Petition No.104378/2022 disposed off on 11th January 2024 has held as follows:
"1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
a) Issue any appropriate Writ, Order or Direction including a writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned endorsement dated 16.11.2018 bearing No. HaViPaPraNiPra/Ho/08/2018-19/915 addressed by the Respondent Authority to the Petitioner, vide Annexure-K to the Writ Petition.-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16901 WP No. 105433 of 2016 HC-KAR
b) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondent to issue NOC for conversion of land from Agricultural to Residential purposes as sought by the Petitioner vide application dated 22.08.2011 which is produced herewith as Annexure-C.
c) To pass any other order under the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.
2. The petitioner had approached the respondent for issuance of No Objection Certificate (NOC) in terms of Section 14 of the Hampi World Heritage Area Management Authority Act, 2002. Vide endorsement dated 16.11.2018 at Annexure-K, the said request has been rejected by the State Government on the ground that the land comes within the core area, the access road is only 3.5 meters in width and that any construction would obstruct the view of the Virupaksha Temple in Hampi. It is aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court.
3. In furtherance of the 1972 UNESCO World Heritage Convention, certain areas have been declared as world heritage sites. It is in furtherance thereof that the Hampi World Heritage Area Management Authority has been constituted, requiring no objection from the said authority for any development in the lands coming under its jurisdiction. Apart there from, the zonal regulations of Hampi require various permissions including that from ASI, Archaeological Survey of India etc for development.
4. If at all the petitioner is aggrieved by refusal of the NOC sought for under Section 14 (1) of the Hampi World Heritage Management Authority Act, 2002 there is an appellate remedy provided under Section 14(5) of the Hampi World Heritage Management Authority Act, 2002, and it is for the State Government to exercise its discretion in the matter taking into consideration the designation of the area as a world heritage site, which this Court would not be in a position to do.
-5-NC: 2025:KHC-D:16901 WP No. 105433 of 2016 HC-KAR
5. Hence, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file necessary appeal under Section 14(5) of the Hampi World Heritage Management Authority Act, 2002, which shall be considered by the appellate authority in accordance with all applicable laws the petition stands dismissed."
3. In the light of the issue standing covered by the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court (supra), on all its fours and on the same reasons, the subject petition also stands disposed reserving liberty to the petitioner to file necessary appeal under Section 14(5) of the Hampi World Heritage Management Authority Act, 2002, which shall be considered by the Appellate Authority in accordance with all applicable laws.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE KGK CT:ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 165