Hanumanth Rangappa Hadhimani v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC20 Apr 2021WP/7855/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought a deemed conversion order for agricultural land for quarrying operations under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, relying on a prior judgment. The court directed the Deputy Commissioner to communicate the payable conversion fine within three days of payment. Actual change of user requires subsequent licensing.

What did the court decide?

Release of conversion fine to the petitioner and deemed conversion upon payment and subsequent licensing.

Hanumanth Rangappa Hadhimani Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2021

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 7855/2021 (GM-MM-S)

¶7

BETWEEN

¶8

HANUMANTH RANGAPPA HADHIMANI PROPRIETOR OF SHREE VENKATESH STONE CRUSHER AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/O BATAKURKI VILLAGE, RAMDURGA TALUK BELAGAVI DISTRICT ... PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. S.Y. SHIVALLI, ADVOCATE-VC)

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPTD. BY ITS SECRETARY DEPT. OF REVENUE VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560001

¶12

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BELAGAVI DISTRICT - 590001

¶13

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY SANGAMESHWAR NAGAR BELAGAVI – 590001 … RESPONDENTS

¶14

(BY SRI. B.V. KRISHNA, AGA-PH)

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTION, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION /REPRESENTATION DATED 17/22-03/-2021, FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR SEEKING DEEMED CONVERSION ORDER IN RESPECT OF THE LAND BEARING SY.NO.312/5 MEASURING 1 ACRE OUT OF 4 ACRES

¶16

¶17

SITUATED AT BATAKURKI VILLAGE, RAMADURGA TALUK, BELAGAVI DISTRICT UNDER SECTION 95(9) OF KLR ACT (ANNEXURE-C) FROM AGRICULTURAL TO NON AGRICULTURAL PURPOSE I.E., FOR CARRYING ON QUARRYING OPERATION AND FURTHER DIRECT THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES TO COLLECT THE NECESSARY CONVERSION FINE/CHARGES AS PER RULE 107 OF KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE RULES AND ETC.

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents.

¶21

There is no dispute that this petition will be governed by the Judgment and order dated 21^st November 2019 in the Writ Petition No.35133/2019.

¶22

Therefore, we dispose of this petition by passing the following:

¶23

ORDER

¶24

i) We direct the second respondent to communicate to the petitioner the conversion fine payable on the

¶25

basis of the application made by the petitioner at Annexure-C within a period of three weeks from today;

¶26

¶27

ii) On payment of the said conversion fine, conversion shall be deemed to have been granted on the basis of the application at Annexure-C in accordance with Sub-section (9) of Section 95 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964;

¶28

iii) We make it clear that the actual change of user can be effected only after a licence or a lease is granted to the petitioner for carrying out the quarrying operations.

¶29

iv) The petition is disposed of in terms of the above directions.

Sd/-

CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/JUDGE

Hanumanth Rangappa Hadhimani v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hanumanth Rangappa Hadhimani v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr Keerthi Gowda B S Vs Dr Karisiddappa

Sri a Ramasanjeevaiah Vs sri shambe gowda

Sri. P. Visweswaraiah Vs Dr. H. R. Mahadev

Ramesh Naik L Vs Karnataka State Bar Council

Sri. Shivamadhu Vs Sri. Dr D B Natesha

Hanumanth Rangappa Hadhimani Vs the State of Karnataka