Karnataka High Court
Sri A Yankanna vs The State Of Karnataka And Anr on 17 March, 2022
Bench: Jyoti Mulimani
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 17 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI
WRIT PETITION NO.200716 OF 2022 (KLR-CON)
BETWEEN:
SRI A.YANKANNA
S/O DODDAMAREPPA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
OCC:BUSINESS & AGRICULTURE,
R/O TIMMAPUR PET,
TQ: & DIST. RAICHUR - 584 101. ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI ARUNKUMAR AMARGUNDAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
DEPT. OF REVENUE,
REPRESENTED BY IT'S UNDER SECRETARY,
VIDHAN SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 01.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
RAICHUR, DIST:RAICHUR - 584 101.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.SHIVAKUMAR R. TENGLI, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN
RELIEFS.
2
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Sri.Arunkumar Amargundappa, learned counsel for
petitioner and Sri.Shivakumar R. Tengli, learned Additional
Government Advocate for respondent, have appeared
in-person.
Though the matter is listed for preliminary hearing,
with the consent of learned counsel appearing for parties,
the matter is taken up for final hearing.
2. The petitioner has sought for a direction by
issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing
respondent No.2 to consider the application of the
petitioner dated 16.10.2020 and to permit the petitioner to
convert/divert the land bearing Sy.No.115/1 measuring 3
acres 00 guntas (out of 16 acres 00 guntas) situated at
Raichur City, into non-agriculture, commercial purpose.
3. Heard Sri.Arunkumar Amargundappa, learned
counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Shivkumar R. Tengli,
learned Additional Government Advocate.
4. The brief facts leading to filing of this writ
petition as borne out from the reading of the pleadings are
that: the petitioner claims to be the owner of land bearing
Sy.No.1155/1 measuring 16 acres 00 guntas situated at,
Raichur City and he has applied for conversion after
seeking no objection certificate from various authorities on
16.10.2020 along with all the documents before the
competent authorities.
5. The case of the petitioner is that despite
passage of time i.e., the application being filed on
16.10.2020, no order has been issued by the Authorities in
granting conversion as required under Section 95 of the
Karnataka Land Revenue Act (for short 'the Act'). The
learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it is
deemed to have been converted under Section 95(5) of
the Act.
6. The issue raised in this petition is covered by
several judgments of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court
in Rudraswamy vs. Deputy Commissioner, reported in ILR
1994 KAR 2958; Annappa Bagi and others vs. the State of
Karnataka and Another (WP Nos.108395-97/2016,
19.01.2017); and Vinod Kumar Anwarkar vs. The Deputy
Commissioner and others (WP No.20196/2019,
11.06.2019) and subsequent judgments. I am of the
considered opinion that the petitioner would be entitled for
the benefit of deemed conversion as contemplated under
Section 95(5) of the Act.
7. Hence, I pass the following:
ORDER
i. The writ petition is allowed.
ii. The petitioner is held to be entitled to the
benefit of deemed conversion in respect of
the subject land bearing Sy.No.1155/1
measuring 3 acres 00 guntas (out of 16
acres 00 guntas) situated at
Raichur City.
iii. Respondent No.2 / Deputy Commissioner is
directed to effect conversion and issue
conversion certificate in favour of the
petitioner after receipt of necessary charges
for such conversion, in accordance with law.
iv. The respondent No.2/Deputy Commissioner
is directed to comply with the directions
issued above within a period of three
months from the date of receipt of a
certified copy of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE
VMB
