Point of Law: sub-section (5) of Section 95 of Act would also apply once compliance with any of objection raised has been completed by applicant thus, giving a time period of four months for Deputy Commissioner to raise any further objections for the conversion.

ORDER :

1. Learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

a. "Issue a writ of Mandamus and thereby direct the respondent Nos.1 and 3 to consider the representations dated 15.11.2021, 16.11.2021, 13.09.2022 and 16.09.2022 given by the petitioner vide Annexures-K, L, M and N and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

b. Pass any other order or directions under the facts and circumstances of the case as this Hon'ble Courts deems fit in the interest of justice."

3. Petitioner is the owner in possession of land bearing Sy.No.5/2 measuring 27 guntas and 5/8 measuring 27 guntas situated at Kahanapur K village, Basavakalyan Taluk, Bidar District. The petitioner had filed an application under Section 95(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') seeking for conversion of the said land from agricultural to non-agricultural residential purpose on 11.12.2020 which is provided with application ID Nos.200103 and 200109. Thereafter, an objection had been raised by the Revenue Inspector that there was loan on the said property. In pursuance of which, the petitioner repaid the said loan and a re-conveyance deed came to be executed on 06.08.2022. Subsequent thereto, the petitioner gave several representations for consideration of the application for conversion since there was no other impediment for such conversion vide representations dated 15.11.2021, 16.11.2021, 13.09.2022 and 16.09.2022 at Annexures-K to N respectively. Despite which, no action has been taken by the respondents. It is in that background, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs.

4. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has repaid the loan and a re-conveyance deed has been executed in favour of the petitioner thus, removing the objection raised by the Revenue Inspector for conversion. Once the same had been done and this fact informed to the respondents, it was for the respondents to have acted on the same and processed the application of the petitioner in terms of Section 95 of the Act.

5. In terms of sub-section (5) of Section 95 of the Act, if the Deputy Commissioner fails to inform the applicant of the decision within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the application, the permission applied for is deemed to have been granted. I am of the considered opinion that sub-section (5) of Section 95 of the Act would also apply once compliance with any of the objection raised has been completed by the applicant thus, giving a time period of four months for the Deputy Commissioner to raise any further objections for the conversion. No such objection having been raised after the earlier objection had been complied with by the petitioner, sub-section (5) of Section 95 of the Act would come into play. Thus, bringing about a deeming fiction in respect of the conversion of the land on account of the application not being processed within the said period.

6. This is not a stray case which is coming up before this Court. This Court has come across several matters where the applications which had been filed for conversion have not been acted upon by the concerned authority resulting in unnecessary litigation being filed before this Court. Therefore, I deem it fit and proper to direct the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, to institute a mechanism of capturing the applications which are filed under Section 95 of the Act along with the date of the said application and the time taken for disposal thereof indicating also the date on which the deemed conversion comes into effect in terms of sub-section (5) of Section 95 of the Act unless objection is raised thereon, these details shall be web hosted on the website of the concerned Deputy Commissioner.

7. In the present case, I pass the following:

ORDER

i. The Writ Petition is allowed.

ii. A mandamus is issued, directing res