Karnataka High Court
Shri B Prabhakarrao S/O Rangarao vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 June, 2025
Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur
Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7777
WP No. 103438 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 103438 OF 2025 (KLR-CON)
BETWEEN:
SHRI B. PRABHAKARRAO S/O. RANGARAO,
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. SANJEEVARAYANAKOTE VILLAGE,
BALLARI-583102, TQ: AND DIST: BALLARI.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRUTHVI K.S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
BALLARI-583101, DIST: BALLARI.
Digitally signed
by 3. THE TAHASILDAR,
VIJAYALAKSHMI
M KANKUPPI BALLARI-583101, DIST: BALLARI.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
BENCH
Date: 2025.06.19 BALLARI-583101, DIST: BALLARI.
16:01:05 +0530
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M.M. KHANNUR, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
A. ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING
THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT ORDER DATED 23/7/2024
ISSUED/UPLOADED THROUGH ONLINE BY THE RESPONDENT
NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-N, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7777
WP No. 103438 of 2025
HC-KAR
B. ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS BY DIRECTING
THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO ISSUE CONVERSION ORDER FOR
RESIDENTIAL PURPOSE PURSUANT TO ONLINE APPLICATION
NO.681452 SUBMITTED TO THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IN
RESPECT OF LAND BRG SVY NO.597/B1B2A3D1B MEASURING
TO AN EXTENT OF 1 ACRE SITUATED AT BALLARI, TQ AND
DIST: BALLARI, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY
AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B'
GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned AGA for the respondents-State.
2. The petitioner is the absolute owner of
agricultural land bearing Sy.No.597/B1b2a3D1B,
measuring 1 acre, situated at Ballari, tq: & dist: Ballari,
having purchased the same by way of registered sale deed
dated 30.03.2005. Pursuant to the registered sale deed,
name of the petitioner is entered in the record of rights.
The petitioner in order to convert his land from agricultural
to non-agricultural/residential use, made an
application/representation to the respondent-Ballari Urban
Development Authority (BUDA) to consider the same,
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7777
HC-KAR
which gave a favourable observation/report to the 2nd
respondent for conversion of land to non-
agricultural/residential use. Pursuant to the enquiry
conducted, respondent No.3 also gave a favourable report
to the 2nd respondent along with detailed observation for
conversion to non-agricultural/residential use. But,
however despite the said report submitted by BUDA and
respondent No.3, the respondent No.2 rejected the
application of the petitioner on unsustainable frivolous
grounds by way of impugned endorsement. The petitioner
is before this Court questioning the impugned
endorsement issued by the 2nd respondent which is
contrary to the provisions of law as contemplated under
Section 95(2)(i) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964
and so also the judgments of this Court in
W.P.No.102319/2024, W.P.No.103059/2023 and
W.P.No.106864/2023.
3. Learned counsel further contends that ones the
land comes within the jurisdiction of the BUDA and the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7777
HC-KAR
land coming within the Municipality, it amounts to deemed
conversion, as contemplated under Section 95(2)(i) of the
KLR Act. Therefore, the land coming within BUDA would
not require further conversion as it amounts to deemed
conversion as contemplated under the provisions of KLR
Act and the rejection of the application is arbitrary despite
the report and opinion submitted by BUDA and the
Tahasildar. Hence the impugned order deserves to be set
aside.
4. Section 95(2(i) of the Karnataka Land Revenue
Act, 1964 reads 1as under:
"95(2)(i) The permission of the Deputy
Commissioner shall not be required for diversion of
lands for non-agricultural purposes, if such lands
assessed or held for the purpose of agriculture, is as
per the land use as specified in the Master Plan duly
published, for the concerned land under the
provisions of the Karnataka Town and Country
Planning Act, 1961 (Karnataka Act 11 of 1963):
Provided that, the prescribed fee under sub-
section (7) shall be paid to the concerned Town
Planning Authority at the time of obtaining requisite
permissions from the Authority along with self
declaration as may be prescribed."
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7777
HC-KAR
5. Learned AGA representing the State, sustains
the order passed by the Authority on the ground that the
petitioner has not produced judgment/ order in
O.S.No.133/2011 and O.S.No.110/1964, therefore, rightly
rejected conversion to non-agricultural/residential
purpose.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner in this matter. There is sufficient force in the
submission put forth by the learned counsel for the
petitioner, as the above stated provisions under Section
95(2)(i) of the KLR Act clearly specifies that if the land
falls within the master plan of the municipality or within
BUDA, then, the land would be deemed to be converted to
non-agricultural/residential purpose and there is no
connection between above suits and land of petitioner.
7. Under the circumstances, the impugned
endorsement issued by the 2nd respondent, is illegal,
perverse and the same deserves to be set aside.
Accordingly, it is set aside. Hence, I pass the following:
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7777
HC-KAR
ORDER
i. This petition is allowed.
ii. The impugned endorsement passed by
respondent No.2 dated 23.07.2024 vide
Annexure-N rejecting the application filed by
the petitioner dated 18.06.2024 is hereby
quashed.
iii. Writ of mandamus is issued directing
respondent No.2 to issue conversion order in
respect of the land of the petitioners in Sy.No.
597/B1b2a3D1B, measuring 1 acre, situated at
Ballari, tq: & dist: Ballari.
iv. This exercise shall be completed by the
respondent No.2 within a period of six weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Sd/-
(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)
JUDGE
KGK
CT-MCK
