THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DHARWAD DISTRICT, DHARWAD v. PUNDALIK

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K V ARAVIND WRIT APPEAL NO.100247 OF 2025 (KLR-CON) BETWEEN: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DHARWAD DISTRICT, DHARWAD. (BY SRI. G.K. HIREGOUDAR, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) …APPELLANT AND: PUNDALIK S/O. KRISHANA APPINBAIL, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. 8, 9 SRI. SHALMALA MUKUND NAGAR, GOKUL ROAD, BEHIND NEW BUS STAND, HUBBALLI, DISTRICT DHARWAD-580004. …RESPONDENT CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA (BY SRI. RAMACHANDRA V.BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. NANDISH PATIL, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL AND SET-ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 23.10.2024 IN W.P. NO.105401/2024, PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.,. THIS WRIT APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7680-DB WA No. 100247 of 2025 HC-KAR CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K V ARAVIND ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS) Delay of 122 days in filing the appeal stands condoned.

The Deputy Commissioner, Dharwad has filed this Writ appeal calling in question the impugned order dated 23.10.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.105401/2024.

The respondent herein had filed an application under Section 95 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act, 1964) seeking conversion of 8 acres 27 guntas of land in Sy.No.232/2 (Block No.232/2) situated at Gamanagatti village of Hubballi Taluk, Dharwad District. An endorsement came to be issued by the appellant-Deputy Commissioner rejecting the application on the ground that an SLP filed by the petitioner’s vendor before the Apex - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7680-DB WA No. 100247 of 2025 HC-KAR Court against the Karnataka Housing Board was still pending consideration. The learned Single Judge accepted the contention of the respondent herein that even if the SLP is pending consideration it will not preclude the Deputy Commissioner from considering the application filed by the petitioner. The learned Single Judge has held that since it is not disputed that the land in question falls within limits of the Hubballi-Dharwad Urban Development Authority, Section 95(2)(i) of the Act, 1964 is attracted and the Deputy Commissioner is bound to grant permission by collecting the prescribed fee under sub-section (7).

Having heard learned Government Advocate for the appellant and the learned counsel for respondent, this Court is of the considered opinion that if at all someone is aggrieved, it would be the Karnataka Housing Board. No objections have been raised at the hands of the Karnataka Housing Board which would enable - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7680-DB WA No. 100247 of 2025 HC-KAR the Deputy Commissioner to reject the application or to issue such an endorsement.

That being the position, we are of the considered opinion that the appellant should proceed to collect the prescribed fee and pass necessary orders in terms of Section 95(2)(i) of the Act, 1964.

The Writ Appeal is accordingly dismissed. However, the period for compliance stands extended by another period of four weeks from today. Sd/- (R.DEVDAS) JUDGE Sd/- (K V ARAVIND) JUDGE NAA CT: UMD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0