Disposed

Mudukappa S/O Rangappa Marabannavar v. the Deputy Commissioner

Karnataka HC10 Jan 2024WP/100066/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Landowner challenged rejection of his application to convert land within Hubli-Dharwad Corporation limits for residential use. Relying on prior writ proceedings confirmed up to the Supreme Court, the Court held no conversion permission is required for land within municipal corporation limits and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner held not required to seek conversion permission; land deemed converted for master plan purposes; petition disposed of.

Mudukappa S/O Rangappa Marabannavar Vs the Deputy… — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:629 WP No. 100066 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 100066 OF 2024 (KLR-CON)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

MUDUKAPPA S/O RANGAPPA MARABANNAVAR AGED 43 EYARS, OCC. KSRTC DRIVER, R/O. KELAGINI ONI, GOKUL, TQ. HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. G I GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DHARWAD DISTRICT, DHARWAD.

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

(BY SRI. V.S.KALASURMATH, HCGP)

¶16

SUJATA SUBHASH PAMMAR

¶17

Digitally signed by SUJATA SUBHASH PAMMAR Date: 2024.01.17 00:38:11 -0800

¶18

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT ORDER DATED NIL BEARING NO. NIL PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-B ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT IN RESPECT OF THE LAND BEARING SY. NO. 76/1 MEASURING 1 ACRE 21 GUNTAS SITUATED AT GOKUL, TQ. HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD BY ISSUE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER SUITABLE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTIONS AND ETC.

¶19

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:629 WP No. 100066 of 2024

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Petitioner is the owner of land bearing Sy. No.76/1 measuring 1 acre 21 guntas situated at Gokul, Tq. Hubballi, Dist. Dharwad. An application submitted by the petitioner for converting the land in question for residential purpose was rejected by the respondent based upon report of Hubballi Dharwad Urban Development Authority. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the land in question falls within the Corporation limits of Hubli – Dharwad City Municipal Corporation and as such there is no requirement to obtain prior permission for converting the land in question for the purpose for which it is reserved in the master plan published by the Planning Authority concerned.

¶24

On the other hand, learned High Court Government Pleader would submit that endorsement issued is justified, and the respondent has rightly rejected the application filed by the petitioner seeking permission to divert the land in question for the residential purposes.

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:629 WP No. 100066 of 2024

¶26

I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.

¶27

It is not in dispute that the land in question is situated within the Corporation limits of Hubli-Dharwad Municipal Corporation. A co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. No.105734 of 2016 disposed of on 21.02.2018 has held that if the land falls within the Corporation limits, the provisions of Karnataka Land Revenue Act ceases to apply to the said land. The order passed in the said writ petition was confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No.100124 of 2018. In an appeal filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court by the Urban Development Authority against the judgment passed in the said writ appeal, the Hon’ble Supreme Court confirmed the order passed by this Court.

¶28

In view of the law laid down by this Court in the aforesaid case, it is held that there is no requirement for the petitioner to seek permission to divert the land in question for the residential purposes and the land is deemed to have been converted for the purposes for which it is reserved in the master plan published by the Planning Authority. Therefore, the

¶29

¶30

NC: 2024:KHC-D:629 WP No. 100066 of 2024

¶31

requirement of seeking permission to divert the land in question for the residential purposes is not necessary. With this observation, the writ petition stands disposed off.

¶32

Sd/JUDGE

¶33

RSH LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 46

Mudukappa S/O Rangappa Marabannavar v. the Deputy Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mudukappa S/O Rangappa Marabannavar v. the Deputy Commissioner

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

Sri. S.U. Pai-Co-Operative Credit Vs the Deputy Registrar of Co-Operative

Srinivas S/O Nookaraj Vs State of Karnataka

Yallappa Ramappa Sonnad Vs the Land Tribunal

M/S Bagamane Developers Private Limited Vs Karnataka State Pollution Control Board

Baladev Nayak and Ors. Vs the State of Karnataka and Anr.

Mallikarjun and Anr. Vs the State of Karnataka and Anr.