✦ Karnataka High Court · 17 Jul 2025

THE SANDUR MANGANESE AND IRON ORES LTD. v. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

Case at a glance

Outcome

Allowed

Petition is allowed

Key paragraphs

  • Para 22. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo along with the documents wherein surrounding lands have been converted to non-agricultural purpose along with consent orders and draft map. Learned counsel in support of his case relies upon the order passed by the Co-ordinate…
  • Para 66. In view of the above, when an application is made by the petitioner seeking conversion of the land, it becomes the duty of the Deputy Commissioner-respondent No.2 to consider the same in accordance to the provisions of Section 95 of the Act which specifies…
  • Para 77. Accordingly, I pass the following ORDER (i) Petition is allowed. (ii) Endorsements issued by the respondent dated 14.08.2024 vide Annexures-B to B14 are hereby quashed. (iii) Writ of mandamus is issued directing the respondent to grant conversion in respect of the lands of the…

Judgment

(BY SRI. M.M.KHANNUR, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE) …RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 14.08.2024 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURES-B TO B14 IN RESPECT OF I. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 106/1 MEASURING 5 ACRES 22 GUNTAS II. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 106/5 MEASURING 3 ACRES 21 GUNTAS III. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 107/21 MEASURING 1 ACRE 10 GUNTAS IV. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 107/22 MEASURING 1 ACRE 9 GUNTAS V. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 107/23 MEASURING 4 GUNTAS VI. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 108/3 MEASURING 1 ACRE 1 GUNTAS VII. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 109/5 MEASURING 1 ACRE 19 GUNTAS VIII. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 112/1 MEASURING 1 ACRE IX. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 112/2 MEASURING 1 ACRE 26 GUNTAS X. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 112/3 MEASURING 2 ACRES 35 GUNTAS XI. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 112/4 MEASURING 25 GUNTAS XII. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 112/5 MEASURING 32 GUNTAS - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8865 WP No. 102595 of 2025 HC-KAR XIII. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 112/6 MEASURING 33 GUNTAS XIV. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 112/8 MEASURING 4 ACRE 36 GUNTAS XV. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 112/9 MEASURING 4 ACRES ALL LOCATED IN BASAPUR VILLAGE, TQ AND DIST. KOPPAL PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT AND ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO THE RESPONDENT TO ACCEPT THE NECESSARY CHARGES AND ISSUE THE CONVERSION ORDER IN RESPECT OF LANDS BEARING I. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 106/1 MEASURING 5 ACRES 22 GUNTAS II. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 106/5 MEASURING 3 ACRES 21 GUNTAS III. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 107/21 MEASURING 1 ACRE 10 GUNTAS IV. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 107/22 MEASURING 1 ACRE 9 GUNTAS V. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 107/23 MEASURING 4 GUNTAS VI. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 108/3 MEASURING 1 ACRE 1 GUNTA VII. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 109/5 MEASURING 1 ACRE 19 GUNTAS VIII. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 112/1 MEASURING 1 ACRE IX. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 112/2 MEASURING 1 ACRE 26 GUNTAS X. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 112/3 MEASURING 2 ACRES 35 GUNTAS XI. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 112/4 MEASURING 25 GUNTAS XII. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 112/5 MEASURING 32 GUNTAS XIII. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 112/6 MEASURING 33 GUNTAS XIV. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 112/8 MEASURING 4 ACRE 36 GUNTAS XV. LAND BEARING SY. NO. 112/9 MEASURING 4 ACRES ALL LOCATED IN BASAPUR VILLAGE, TQ AND DIST. KOPPAL ANE ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) Petitioner is the owner and in possession of land bearing lands bearing Sy. Nos.106/1 measuring 5 acres 22 guntas, 106/5 measuring 3 acres 21 guntas, 107/21 measuring 1 acre 10 guntas, 107/22 measuring 1 acre 9 guntas, 107/23 measuring 4 guntas, 108/3 measuring 1 - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8865 WP No. 102595 of 2025 HC-KAR acre 1 guntas, 109/5 measuring 1 acre 19 guntas, 112/1 measuring 1 acre, 112/2 measuring 1 acre 26 guntas, 112/3 measuring 2 acres 35 guntas, 112/4 measuring 25 guntas, 112/5 measuring 32 guntas, 112/6 measuring 33 guntas, 112/8 measuring 4 acre 36 guntas and 112/9 measuring 4 acres situated at Basapur village, Koppal taluk and district. He purchased the aforesaid lands through a registered sale deed and his name is entered in the record of rights. Petitioner made applications dated

14.03.2024 to the respondent requesting for conversion of lands from agriculture to non agriculture purpose which are rejected by the respondent mechanically without assigning any reasons. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court on the ground that the impugned endorsements issued by the respondent are illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Section 95 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act though the lands of the petitioner comes within the Master Plan Area of Koppal. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8865 WP No. 102595 of 2025 HC-KAR

#2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo along with the documents wherein surrounding lands have been converted to non-agricultural purpose along with consent orders and draft map. Learned counsel in support of his case relies upon the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.106296/2024 disposed of on 13.11.2024 wherein in identical situation a similar endorsement was given for rejecting the conversion of land from agriculture to non agriculture purpose. The said writ petition came to be allowed by quashing the said endorsement issued by the Deputy Commissioner therein. Accordingly, the present petitioner also seeks similar relief, as the endorsement issued by the respondent is contrary to the provisions under Section 95(i) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act so also on the ground of non-speaking order without assigning any reasons.

#3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent- Deputy Commissioner contends that this petition is not - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8865 WP No. 102595 of 2025 HC-KAR maintainable for non-impleading the Koppal Urban Development Authority as they have issued Annexure-C which clearly directed the petitioner to produce relevant documents for conversion and the same having not been produced, he sustains the impugned orders.

#4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for respondent.

#5. It is not dispute that the petitioner is the owner of the lands mentioned herienabove and he having sought conversion of lands to non-agriculture purpose, are rejected by the respondent. Apparently, it is seen that even according to Annexure-C issued by the Koppal Urban Development Authority, which clearly states that the lands fall within in the Master Plan, therefore, once the lands comes within the Master Plan, Section 95(i) gets attracted and accordingly, the respondent is duty bound to act in accordance with the provisions of Section 95(i) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. For better understanding Section 95(i) is extracted which reads as follows: - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8865 WP No. 102595 of 2025 HC-KAR "95. Uses of Agricultural land and the procedure for use of agricultural land for other purpose.:(i) The permission of the Deputy Commissioner shall not be required for diversion of for non-agricultural purposes, if such lands assessed or held for the purpose of agriculture, is as per the land use as specified in the Master Plan duly published, for the concerned land under the provisions of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961(Karnataka Act 11 of 1963) Provided that, the prescribed fee under sub-section (7) shall be paid to the concerned Town Planning Authority at the time of obtaining requisite permissions from the Authority along with self declaration as may be prescribed.”

#6. In view of the above, when an application is made by the petitioner seeking conversion of the land, it becomes the duty of the Deputy Commissioner-respondent No.2 to consider the same in accordance to the provisions of Section 95 of the Act which specifies the manner and the procedure to be adopted while considering such applications. Same has not been done in the present case so also there is no speaking or reasoned order by respondent No.2. Therefore, for non-consideration of the - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8865 WP No. 102595 of 2025 HC-KAR provisions of Section 95(i) of the Act and for not passing a speaking order, the present petition deserves to be allowed.

#7. Accordingly, I pass the following ORDER (i) Petition is allowed. (ii) Endorsements issued by the respondent dated 14.08.2024 vide Annexures-B to B14 are hereby quashed. (iii) Writ of mandamus is issued directing the respondent to grant conversion in respect of the lands of the petitioner bearing Sy.Nos.106/1 measuring 5 acres 22 guntas, 106/5 measuring 3 acres 21 guntas, 107/21 measuring 1 acre 10 guntas, 107/22 measuring 1 acre 9 guntas, 107/23 measuring 4 guntas, 108/3 measuring 1 acre 1 guntas, 109/5 measuring 1 acre 19 guntas, 112/1 measuring 1 acre, 112/2 measuring 1 acre 26 guntas, 112/3 measuring 2 acres 35 - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8865 WP No. 102595 of 2025 HC-KAR guntas, 112/4 measuring 25 guntas, 112/5 measuring 32 guntas, 112/6 measuring 33 guntas, 112/8 measuring 4 acre 36 guntas and 112/9 measuring 4 acres situated at Basapur village, Koppal taluk and district. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. (iv) The concerned authority is at liberty to collect required conversion fee, if not already paid. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE ct: mck

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: Petition is allowed

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Companies Act, 2013; Constitution of India — arts. 226, 227; Karnataka Land Revenue Act — ss. 95, 95(i); Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Karnataka High Court, on 17 Jul 2025. The bench was PRADEEP SINGH YERUR.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.

Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Karnataka High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 102595 of 2025). ← Search more judgments