Sri.Ashok Mahaveer Bhadale Vs the State of Karnataka

SRI. ASHOK MAHAVEER BHADALE, S/O MAHAVEER BHADALE, REPRESENTATIVE PARTNER OF DEV MAHALASA INFRA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/A No.366/D, NEHARU ROAD, OPP. LELE GROUND, TILKWADI, BELAGAVI - 590 001.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI SHRIDHAR G. BIDRE, ADVOCATE FOR SRI RAGHAVENDRA G. GAYATRI, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M. S. BUILDINGS, BANGALORE-560001.

¶16

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BELAGAVI DISTRICT, BELAGAVI-590001.

¶17

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, BAUXITE ROAD, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, BELAGAVI-590001.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA)

¶20

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14136-DB WP No. 9032 of 2025

¶21

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 DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION DATED 04.02.2025 (VIDE ANNEXURE-G) AND COMMUNICATE THE FINE AMOUNT PAYABLE FOR CONVERSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 107 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE RULES 1966 TO THE PETITIONER.

¶22

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

¶24

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶25

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND)

¶26

Heard learned advocate Mr. Shridhar G. Bidre for learned

¶27

advocate Mr. Raghavendra G. Gayatri for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate Smt. Niloufer Akbar for the respondents.

¶28

The instant writ petition is with the prayer to issue mandamus directing respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner to issue Challan for depositing fine/charges as per Rule 107 of Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') while seeking deemed conversion under Section 95(9) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') from

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14136-DB WP No. 9032 of 2025

¶30

agricultural to non-agricultural purpose to carry on quarrying activities for extraction of ordinary building stone.

¶31

The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of land bearing Sy.113 measuring 15 acres 34 guntas situated at U. Khanapur Village, Hukkeri Taluk, Belagavi District. The petitioner has filed application for grant of license in Form AQL on 01.09.2024. The concerned authorities conducted inspection and submitted a report recommending issue of license. Various authorities and the Revenue Department have issued no objection certificate for grant of license. However, respondent No.3 has insisted conversion of agricultural land. For this purpose, he approached respondent No.2 seeking deemed conversion of land under Section 95(9) of the Act. Respondent No.2 has not acted on the request.

¶32

It is further stated that once the application is made under Section 95(9) of the Act, the Deputy Commissioner is under obligation to communicate fine payable and on payment of such fine, the land is deemed to be converted under Section 95(9) of the Act.

¶33

4 -

¶34

NC: 2025:KHC:14136-DB WP No. 9032 of 2025

¶35

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the competent authorities have issued requisite permissions/NOCs. The application for quarrying license is pending consideration with respondent No.3 for want of order of conversion under Section 95(9) of the Act. Respondent No.2 without any just reasons has not decided the application and issued Challan for payment of fine. It is submitted that once fine as prescribed is paid, the conversion is deemed to be granted by operation of law.

¶36

In support of the aforesaid submission, learned advocate relies on the judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No.9128 of 2024 decided on 25.07.2024.

¶37

Learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents is unable to dispute the pendency of the applications for quarry licence and for conversion of the land. Learned Additional Government Advocate could not dispute the proposition of law and the applicability of judgment in Writ Petition No.19131 of 2024 to the facts of the present case.

¶38

Considered the submissions of learned advocates for the parties and perused the writ papers.

¶39

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:14136-DB WP No. 9032 of 2025

¶40

The ownership of land by the petitioner in Sy.113 situated at U. Khanapur Village, Hukkeri Taluk, Belagavi District and the application for quarry licence to extract ordinary building stone and the pendency of that application is not in dispute. Further, the pendency of application for land conversion is with respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner is also not disputed. In view of Section 95(9) of the Act and in the light of the judgments of this Court holding that, once the application is made, the Deputy Commissioner is under obligation to communicate the fine payable in accordance with Rules 107 of the Rules, in all force applies to the facts of the present case.

¶41

The facts in the present case are similar to Writ Petition No.9128 of 2024. This Court in Writ Petition No.9128 of 2024 has issued the following directions,

¶42

“(i) The application-representation of the petitioner dated 19.01.2024 shall be considered and decided by the competent authority-Deputy Commissioner, who shall communicate to the petitioner about the amount of fine payable for conversion in accordance with rules 107 of the 1966 Rules.

¶43

(ii) Such intimation shall be given by the Deputy Commissioner within eight weeks from the date of receipt of present order.

¶44

(iii) Upon payment of the necessary charges has may be indicated as above, the application of the

¶45

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:14136-DB WP No. 9032 of 2025

¶46

petitioner dated 19.01.2024 shall be deemed to have been granted under sub Section 9(95) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964.

¶47

(iv) It is made clear that the issue whether the petitioner is entitled to a licence under said Act of 2011 is kept open. While considering the application for grant of a licence under the said Act of 2011, even the grounds which are set out in the impugned order can be considered in accordance with law.

¶48

(v) It is further made clear that even if a deemed conversion as above is granted, the petitioner is entitled to use the said land for non agricultural purpose of stone crushing only after a licence under the said Act of 2011 is granted.”

¶49

The case referred to supra addresses the issue raised in this petition.

¶50

Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the applications dated 24.01.2025 and 04.02.2025 in light of the directions mentioned supra .

¶51

The respondents shall complete the aforementioned exercise

¶52

within eight weeks, if not already undertaken.

¶53

Sd/(N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶54

Sd/(K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE

¶55

MV, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 120

Sri.Ashok Mahaveer Bhadale v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.Ashok Mahaveer Bhadale v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Srinivas Vs the State of Karnataka

Mahendra Kumar Mitra Vs National Commission for Scheduled Castes

Narayanamurthy K v Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Gurusiddappa Bhimappa Gunjigavi Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. T.G. Mallikarjuna Gouda, Vs State of Karnataka

Taurus Powertronics Private Limitd Vs M K Srinivasan