IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 3194 OF 2023 (LB-RES)

BETWEEN:

1. SRI. GANESH GOWDA AGE: 60 YEARS S/O LATE KARIYAPPA GOWDA RESIDING AT KIRIJAJI FARM KASABA HOBLI, HUNASUR TOWN, MYSORE DISTRICT.

2. SRI. R. JAYASHANKAR AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O R. RANGASWAMY RESIDING AT NO.100 D.V.G. ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI BANGALORE-560004 BOTH PARTNERS OF POORVA DEVELOPERS NO.667/A, 1^ST FLOOR, CHITRABHAN ROAD E AND F BLOCK, KUVEMPU NAGARA, Digitally signed by MYSORE.

SUMA …PETITIONERS Location:

HIGH (BY SRI. RAJENDRA M.S., ADVOCATE)

COURT OF KARNATAKA AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001.

2. MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BY ITS COMMISSIONER JHANSY LAKSHMI BHAI ROAD, MYSORE-570005. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. BOPANNA, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1;

SRI. G.B.SHARATH GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING FOR A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI THERE BY DATED 10.11.2022 BEARING NO. MYNPRA/N.YO.SHA/VA.V.N/2022/2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-A ISSUED BY THE 2^ND RESPONDENT AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

ORAL ORDER

The petitioners have sought for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the endorsement bearing No.MYNPRA/N.YO.SHA/VA.V.N/2022/23 dated 10.11.2022 issued by respondent No.2. They have also sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondents to grant approval for formation of a layout in survey No.47/4 of Lingambudhi Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk.

2. The petitioners claim that the land bearing survey No.47/4 (old survey No.47/2) situated in Lingambudhi Palya, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk, measuring 03 acres was converted for non-agricultural residential use by the Deputy Commissioner Mysore, vide order bearing No.ALN(1)CR367/2005-06 dated 07.04.2010. They purchased the aforesaid 03 acres of land in terms of a sale deed dated 31.10.2013. Thereafter, they sold 01 acre to Smt.Chikkathayamma. They submitted a representation dated 18.03.2021 before the respondent No.2 for sanction of a plan to form sites in the remaining 02 acres of land in survey No.47/4. The respondent No.2 approved the request and called upon the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.5,22,200/- in terms of its communication dated 03.08.2022. Accordingly, the petitioners deposited the said sum with the respondent No.2 on 01.09.2022. However, the respondent No.2 in terms of the impugned endorsement dated 10.11.2022 rejected the application of the petitioners on the ground that they had alienated 01 acre and had bifurcated the land without obtaining permission from the appropriate authority. The petitioners are therefore before this Court.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is no embargo in law against the petitioners alienating a portion of their land that was earlier converted for non- agricultural purposes. He contends that the impugned endorsement is issued on the basis of a communication issued by the State Government dated 24.08.2022, wherein it was stated that whenever converted land is bifurcated without obtaining appropriate permission from the planning authority, no plan shall be sanctioned in respect of the bifurcated land.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this condition is applicable is only in respect of sites that may be formed in the layout and does not, in any manner, affect the rights of the petitioners to sell the land that was converted. He contends that the respondent No.2 is bound to consider the request of the petitioners for sanction of a layout plan in respect of the remaining extent of land, as the entire land was already converted for non- agricultural purposes. He submits that there is no provision in the Karnata