Allowed

Shri M U Lokesh v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC27 Sept 2021WP/17420/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the Deputy Commissioner to communicate the conversion fine within three weeks under Section 95(9) of the KLR Act. Upon payment, deemed conversion is automatic, though actual non-agricultural use is contingent upon a granted quarrying licence.

What did the court decide?

Decided the conversion application, communicated fine within 3 weeks; deemed conversion granted on payment; use for stone crushing subject to licence.

Shri M U Lokesh Vs State of Karnataka — Environment and Pollution | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO.17420 OF 2021 (GM-MM-S)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SHRI M.U.LOKESH S/O LATE UGRAIAH AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS R/AT NO.31, 5^TH MAIN 5^TH CROSS NEAR SYNDICATE BANK SARASWTHIPURAM MYSORE - 570 009.

¶11

....PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI L.M.AMITH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI L.M. CHIDANANDAYYA, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE (SSI & TEXTILES) M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶15

DIRECTOR OF MINES & GEOLOGY KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶16

¶17

SENIOR GEOLOGIST KHANJI DEPARTMENT VIDYANAGAR 1^ST CROSS MANDYA DISTRICT MANDYA - 571 401.

¶18

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANDYA DISTRICT MANDYA - 571 401.

¶19

….RESPONDENTS

¶20

(SRI S.S.MAHENDRA, AGA)

¶21

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS WHICH ULTIMATELY RESULTED IN NOT GRANTING THE DEEMED ONVERSION OF THE LAND FROM AGRICULTURE TO NON AGRICULTURE AND ISSUE AN ORDER, DIRECTION OR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE 4^TH RESPONDENT TO ISSUE THE OFFICIAL MEMORANDAUM PERMITTING THE PETITIONER TO USE THE SCHEDULE PROPERTIES FROM AGRICULTURE TO NON ON RECEIPT OF THE CONVERSION FEE FOR USE OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTIES FOR NON-AGRICULTURE PURPOSE AND ETC.

¶22

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

¶24

ORDER

¶25

Learned AGA accepts notice on behalf of the

¶26

respondents.

¶27

The captioned writ petition is filed seeking a direction against the respondent No.4 to permit the petitioner to use the schedule property from agricultural to non-agricultural purposes as provided under Section 95(9) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short 'KLR Act, 1964'). The petitioner has also sought for a mandamus to direct the respondent No.3 to execute licence deed pursuant to notification dated 25.11.2017.

¶28

The petitioner claims that he is the owner of agricultural lands bearing Sy.No.195/1 measuring 35 guntas and Sy.No.195/3 measuring 35 guntas. The petitioner submitted an application under the provisions of the Karnataka

¶29

Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 seeking grant of quarrying licence for extracting and removing the building

¶30

¶31

stone. The respondent No.3 having secured report from the Deputy Conservator of Forest as well as jurisdictional Tahsildar, issued a notification on 25.11.2017 granting quarrying licence to the petitioner. In furtherance of the quarrying licence granted by the competent authority, the petitioner submitted an application to obtain deemed conversion of the land under Section 95(9) of the KLR Act, 1964. The petitioner has also contended that the competent authority has also granted environmental clearance.

¶32

The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent No.3 is not executing licence deed on the premise that the petitioner has not secured deemed conversion. On these set of grounds, the present writ petition is filed.

¶33

Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned AGA for the respondents. Perused the records.

¶34

The issue involved in the present case is no more

¶35

res integra and the same is covered by the judgment laid

¶36

¶37

down by the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.35133/2019 disposed of on 21.11.2019. This Court while examining the identical issue has held that once an application is filed under Section 95(9) of the KLR Act, 1964, the Deputy Commissioner to whom the application is made is under an obligation to communicate the fine payable to such applicant in accordance with Rule 107 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966 (for short "KLR Rules, 1966") and once such fine is paid, the deeming fiction under sub-section (9) of Section 95 of the KLR Act, 1964 immediately comes into operation. The ratio laid down by the Co-Ordinate Bench in the aforesaid decision is squarely applicable to the present case on hand.

¶38

The material on record clearly indicates that the application filed by the petitioner is kept pending. The petitioner has also stated at paragraph 10 that respondent No.3 without justifiable reasons has passed an order on 20.06.2019 and has withdrawn the notification dated

¶39

¶40

25.11.2017 wherein quarrying licence was granted in favour of the petitioner. Sub-section (9) of Section 95 of the KLR Act, 1964, refers to the Rules governing quarrying of mines and minerals. Therefore, once an application is made to the Deputy Commissioner and requisite conversion fine is paid, the permission for diversion is automatic.

¶41

Hence, we pass the following:

¶42

ORDER

¶43

(i) The application dated 08.11.2017 submitted by the petitioner under Sub-Section (9) of Section 95 of the KLR Act, 1964, shall be decided by the respondent No.4 and the respondent No.4-Deputy Commissioner, Mandya District, shall communicate the amount of fine payable for conversion in accordance with Rule 107 of the KLR Rules, 1966 to the petitioner within a period of three weeks from today;

¶44

(ii) As the application for conversion dated 08.11.2017 is already pending, on payment of fine as demanded by the Deputy

¶45

¶46

Commissioner, a deemed conversion in respect of the schedule land as prayed for in application dated 08.11.2017 shall be deemed to have been granted to the petitioner under Sub-Section (9) of Section 95 of the KLR Act, 1964;

¶47

(iii) We make it clear that even if a deemed conversion as above is granted, the petitioner is entitled to use the said land for nonagricultural purpose of stone crushing only after a licence under the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 is granted;

¶48

(iv) The petition is allowed on the above terms with no order as to costs.

¶49

(vi) The pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶50

Sd/ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

¶51

Sd/JUDGE

¶52

Shri M U Lokesh v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri M U Lokesh v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Goolaiah Vs the State of Karnataka

M.N Manjunath Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Jayaramaiah Vs the State of Karnataka

Srinivasamurthy T R Vs the Bangalore Development Authroity

Sri Prashanth Rao Vs the Secretary the Rama Mandira Trust

Sri Bommalingaiah v Katapurmath Vs State of Karnataka