2023 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 22959
- 1 -
WP No. 22205 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
WRIT PETITION NO. 22205 OF 2022 (GM-MM-S)
BETWEEN:
1 . SRI L VINAYRAJU
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
NO.122 A AND B BLOCK
NAVELU ROAD, 7TH CROSS
KUVEMPUNAGARA
MYSURU-570001.
2 . M NAGARAJ
SON OF LATE MAYEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS
NO.59, ESHWARA TEMPLE ROAD
DODDAPALYA
SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT-571807.
3 . M CHANDRU
SON OF LATE MAYEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
A DODDAPALYA, DODDAPALYA
SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT-571807.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. LAKAMAPURMATH CHIDANANDAYYA.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
by R DEEPA
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
- 2 -
WP No. 22205 of 2022
1 .
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY THE ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY
TO THE DEPARTMENT OF FOREST
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BENGALURU-560001.
2 .
THE DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
THE DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
FOR THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD
BENGALURU-560001.
3 .
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
MANDYA DISTRICT
MANDYA-571401.
4 .
THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST
THE DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
AND THE MEMBER SECRETARY
VIDYA NAGAR, FIRST CROSS, MANDYA DISTRICT
MANDYA-571401.
5 .
THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS
MANDYA SUB DIVISION
MANDYA-571401.
….RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S.S. MAHENDRA, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL
FOR THE RECORDS WHICH ULTIMATELY RESULTED IN ISSUING
THE ONLINE ENDORSEMENTS DATED 02/04/2022 ISSUED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT/DEPUTY COMMMISSIONER, MANDYA
DISTRICT, MANDYA, WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURES-A
TO
A2,
REJECTING
THE
APPLICATION
FOR
DEEMED
CONVERSION OF THE LAND UNDER SECTION 95(9) OF THE
KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, ASHOK S. KINAGI, J., MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
- 3 -
WP No. 22205 of 2022
The grant of conversion under Section 95(9) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 is automatic upon application and payment of fine, subject to obtaining a lease or license for quarrying or stone crushing activity.
Headnote:
LAND CONVERSION - DEEMED CONVERSION - SECTION 95(9) OF THE KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT, 1964 - AUTOMATIC GRANT OF CONVERSION UPON APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF FINE - SUBJECT TO OBTAINING LEASE OR LICENSE FOR QUARRYING OR STONE CRUSHING ACTIVITY
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought deemed conversion of their land under Section 95(9) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (the Act of 1964) for industrial and quarrying purposes. The application was rejected by the respondent on the ground that the land was a deemed forest. The petitioners challenged the rejection order, arguing that the grant of conversion under Section 95(9) is automatic upon application and payment of fine.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the grant of permission for diversion of land under Section 95(9) of the Act of 1964 is automatic upon an application being made for diversion along with the fine applicable to the Deputy Commissioner. The court further held that the deemed permission is subject to obtaining a lease or license for quarrying or stone crushing activity, and that the occupant can commence the use of agricultural land for such purposes only when such lease or license is granted.
Issues: Whether the grant of conversion under Section 95(9) of the Act of 1964 is automatic upon application and payment of fine.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the plain language of Section 95(9) of the Act of 1964, which provides that upon application for diversion of agricultural land for quarrying or stone crushing activity and payment of the applicable fine, permission for diversion shall be deemed to have been granted subject to obtaining a lease or license for such activity.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned rejection order, and directed the respondent to communicate the amount of fine payable for conversion to the petitioners within three weeks. Upon payment of the fine, the court directed the respondent to grant deemed conversion of the land as prayed for in the petitioners' application.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2023 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 22205 OF 2022 (GM-MM-S)
BETWEEN:
1 . SRI L VINAYRAJU AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS NO.122 A AND B BLOCK NAVELU ROAD, 7TH CROSS KUVEMPUNAGARA MYSURU-570001.
2 . M NAGARAJ SON OF LATE MAYEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS NO.59, ESHWARA TEMPLE ROAD DODDAPALYA SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK Digitally signed MANDYA DISTRICT-571807.
by R DEEPA 3 . M CHANDRU Location: High SON OF LATE MAYEGOWDA Court of AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS Karnataka A DODDAPALYA, DODDAPALYA SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571807.
…PETITIONERS (BY SRI. LAKAMAPURMATH CHIDANANDAYYA.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF FOREST VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001.
2 . THE DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY THE DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY FOR THE STATE OF KARNATAKA KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU-560001.
3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANDYA DISTRICT MANDYA-571401.
4 . THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST THE DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY AND THE MEMBER SECRETARY VIDYA NAGAR, FIRST CROSS, MANDYA DISTRICT MANDYA-571401.
5 . THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS MANDYA SUB DIVISION MANDYA-571401. ….RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.S. MAHENDRA, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS WHICH ULTIMATELY RESULTED IN ISSUING THE ONLINE ENDORSEMENTS DATED 02/04/2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT/DEPUTY COMMMISSIONER, MANDYA DISTRICT, MANDYA, WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURES-A TO A2, REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR DEEMED CONVERSION OF THE LAND UNDER SECTION 95(9) OF THE KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ASHOK S. KINAGI, J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The order, subject matter of challenge in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is of the endorsement dated 02.04.2022, passed by respondent No.3 vide Annexure-A to A2, rejecting the application for deemed conversion of the land under Section 95(9) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short ‘the Act of
1964’), has been rejected.
2. The petitioners are claiming to be the owners of land in Sy.No.18 of Neelanakoppalu Village, Shrirangapattana Taluk. The said land in Sy.No.18 was never treated as a forest land at any point of time earlier. The Tahsildar of Shrirangapattana Taluk granted land to Sri M.Nagaraj S/o Mayegowda on 05.06.1997 and also to M.Chandru i.e., petitioner Nos.2 and 3. Petitioner Nos.2 and 3, as the owners of the land, made an application for phodi and durasti work. After phodi, the land in Sy.No.18 was granted to petitioner Nos.2 and 3 was renumbered as Sy.Nos.82 and 83 of Neelanakoppalu Village, Shrirangapattana Taluk, Mandya District. Petitioner No.1 with a view to obtain the quarrying licence under the provisions of Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 (for short ‘the Rules of 1994’) submitted an application in the prescribed form and petitioner No.1 also made an application for issuance of licence for establishment of the stone crusher unit in the Sy.No.82 to an extent of 1 acre. In pursuance to the application submitted by the petitioner, the revenue authority and the forest department issued NOC under Rule 8(5) of the Rules of 1994 for grant of quarrying licence in favour of the petitioners. The petitioners with a view to obtain the conversion of the land under Section 95(9) of the Act of 1964 submitted an application to respondent No.3 seeking conversion of the schedule properties for industrial and quarrying purposes. Respondent No.3 has rejected the said application. Hence, this writ petition.
3. The respondents have the filed the statement of objections contending that originally the land in Sy.Nos.82 and 83/1 was a Government land and the said lands were granted in favour of the different grantees. It is submitted that the peti