Disposed

Srinivas S/O Nookaraj v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC9 Jan 2024WP/101645/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WP challenging non-consideration of agricultural to non-agricultural land conversion application. Court found land designated for transport purposes in master plan, rendering relief inapplicable. Petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed off as land is designated for transport and communication in master plan; Liberty reserved to file appropriate application.

Srinivas S/O Nookaraj Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:453 WP No. 101645 of 2018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 101645 OF 2018 (KLR-CON)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRINIVAS S/O NOOKARAJ AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: T.B. DAM, HOSAPETE, TQ: HOSAPETE, DIST: BALLARI.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. A.M.MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.

¶14

SUJATA SUBHASH PAMMAR

¶15

Digitally signed by SUJATA SUBHASH PAMMAR Date: 2024.01.19 22:58:18 -0800

¶16

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOPPAL DIVISION, DIST: KOPPAL-583231.

¶17

THE TAHASHILDAR TAHASHILDAR OFFICE KOPPAL, DIST: KOPPAL-583231.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

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

¶20

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS AND DECLARE THAT THE PETITIONER LAND BEARING SY.NO.287/1 SITUATED AT KOPPAL VILLAGE HAVE BEEN DEEMED TO BE CONVERTED FROM AGRICULTURAL TO NONAGRICULTURAL BY OPERATION OF SECTION 95(5) OF THE KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT, 1964 AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO COLLECT THE NECESSARY

¶21

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:453 WP No. 101645 of 2018

¶22

CONVERSION CHARGES AS IT EXISTED AS ON THE DATE OF DEEMED CONVERSION.

¶23

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

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The petitioner claiming to be the owner of the land bearing No.287/1 measuring 1 acre 16 guntas situated within the limits of Koppal, submitted an application under Section 95(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, to divert the land from agricultural purposes to residential purposes. The said application was filed on 20.02.2017, and the contentions of the petitioner is that the Deputy Commissioner having not passed an order on the said application, within four months as stated under Section 95(5) o

¶26

f the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, the permission is deemed to have been granted.

¶27

Learned HCGP for the State has placed on record the endorsement dated 24.04.2018 issued by the Deputy Commissioner stating that the application submitted by the petitioner cannot be considered, since in the master plan

¶28

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:453 WP No. 101645 of 2018

¶29

published by the Koppal Town Municipal Council, the subject land is designated for transport and communication purposes.

¶30

Therefore, the relief sought for in this petition does

¶31

not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed off.

¶32

Liberty is reserved with the petitioner to file an appropriate application with the competent authority for utilizing the subject property for residential purposes, or change of user, if so advised.

¶33

Sd/JUDGE

¶34

Rsh LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 49

Srinivas S/O Nookaraj v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Srinivas S/O Nookaraj 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

M/S Raj Fabricators and Vs the Assistant Commissioner of

Smt. Yallawwa W/O. Bharmappa Madar Vs Shri. Chandrappa Kalsappa Holer

Lalita W/O Halappa Katagi Vs Sub Registrar Mundgod

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

Yallappa Ramappa Sonnad Vs the Land Tribunal

Shri.Pralhad Vs the Assistant Commissioner and