Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 755 (KAR)

Samilulla Khan v. State of Karnataka

2013-07-02

B.V.NAGARATHNA, D.H.WAGHELA

body2013
ORDER : B.V. Nagarathna, J. 1. The petitioner has sought a direction against the respondents to consider his application dated 5-11-2012 (Annexure-B) and to extend the granite quarrying lease for a period of 20 years. The brief facts of the case are, that the petitioner is the owner in possession of Sy. Nos. 160/9 and 160/10 of Harve Village, Chamarajanagar Taluk and Chamarajanagar District, admeasuring 2 acres. The petitioner had obtained a quarrying lease with effect from 9-1-2002 for a period of 10 years (QL No. 489) for the purpose of extraction of black granite. The said lease has come to an end on 8-1-2012. He, thereafter, made an application for renewal of the lease. The grievance of the petitioner is that the said quarrying lease has not been renewed, on the premise that the land owned by him is a patta land and the conversion of the said land for non-agricultural activity has not been obtained. It is under these circumstances that a direction is sought against the respondents to extend the lease period from 10 years to 20 years with effect from 9-1-2002 and also to hold that there is deemed conversion of the lands in question. 2. We have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that in terms of the Central Rules namely, Granite Conservation and Development Rules, 1999 the quarrying lease has to be granted for a minimum period of 20 years. However, in the instant case, it had been granted for a period of 10 years. It is under these circumstances, an application for renewal was filed, in response to which, the authorities contended that conversion of the land is required under Section 95 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short, 'the Act'). The petitioner had also filed an application seeking conversion of the lands, but the said application has not been considered. He, therefore, contended that in terms of Section 95of the Act, the application filed for conversion of the lands must be held to be allowed and the quarrying lease must be extended for a period of 10 more years. 4. The petitioner had also filed an application seeking conversion of the lands, but the said application has not been considered. He, therefore, contended that in terms of Section 95of the Act, the application filed for conversion of the lands must be held to be allowed and the quarrying lease must be extended for a period of 10 more years. 4. Learned Additional Government Advocate has, however, stated that in view of the decision of the Division Bench in M. Kokila v. State of Karnataka and Others, 2009(6) Kar. L.J. 590 (DB): ILR 2009 Kar. 2583 (DB), conversion of patta land for non-agricultural purpose is a mandatory requirement, and therefore, the authorities were correct in contending that the petitioner must seek conversion of the lands, in respect of which quarrying lease was obtained and after the said conversion, renewal could have been granted. It is further stated that the application filed by the petitioner for conversion of the land has been rejected in view of their being certain deficiencies in the same. 5. In the circumstances, we think that the petitioner having ownership of the patta lands and keeping in mind the decision of the Division Bench, has rightly made an application seeking conversion of the lands in question for mining purpose, which is a non-agricultural activity. However, the grievance of the petitioner is that his application for conversion has not been considered in time, as a result, there is a delay in consideration of the extension of quarrying lease. We think that the petitioner is not seeking extension of quarrying lease. The quarrying lease which was granted with effect from 9-1-2002 ought to have been for a period of 20 years, having regard to the dictum of the Division Bench of this Court in W.P. No. 9522 of 2013 disposed of on 22-3-2013 and the Central Rules. However, since the Division Bench of this Court in M. Kokila's case has held that insofar as the patta lands are concerned, conversion of agricultural land into non-agricultural purpose is mandatory, we think that such a requirement must be complied with by the petitioner in the instant case particularly having regard to the fact that he had made an application to seek conversion. Therefore, without going into the merits of the application which has already been filed by the petitioner, he is at liberty to make one more application under Section 95 of the Act, before the concerned authority, which will consider the said application within the period prescribed under the said section. After the conversion order is made by the Deputy Commissioner, the lease shall stand renewed for a period of 20 years with effect from 9-1-2002. This is having regard to the directions issued in the aforesaid writ petition, which is extracted as follows: "The respondents are directed to treat the period of lease in respect of the petitioner to be for 20 years instead of 10 years with effect from 29-1-2004 which would be in accordance with law and in terms of the decision referred to above. The petitioner shall take steps for payment of additional stamp duty for the Registration of the lease deed and the Sub-Registrar shall accordingly register the lease deed insofar as it stands modified by the present order". The writ petitions are disposed of with the aforesaid directions.