ORDER : 1. This intra-court appeal is directed against the order dated 29.11.2016 passed in Writ Petition No. 202682/2016 whereunder learned Single Judge has declined to entertain the writ petition on the ground that petitioner has an alternate remedy of filing an appeal under Section 49 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short ‘Act’). 2. Petitioner herein submitted an application for conversion of agricultural land to non agricultural purposes by application dated 17.01.2015 and on account of non consideration of said application, direction was sought to respondent to receive the conversion fee and issue conversion certificate contending inter-alia that there is deemed conversion under Section 95(5) of the Act and as such a writ of mandamus was sought to direct respondent to receive conversion fee and issue certificate permitting the use of land to nonagricultural purposes and said writ petition came to be dismissed on the ground of petitioner having alternate remedy. 3. Facts on hand would disclose that petitioner submitted application dated 17.01.2015 for conversion of his agricultural land to nonagricultural residential purposes. Though two years have lapsed till date, such consideration has not seen the light of the day. Though Mr. Sachin M. Mahajan learned Advocate appearing for petitioner would press into service that under sub-section (5) of Section 95 of the Act, deeming provision would come into effect and as such application of the petitioner is deemed to have been granted and only course left open to respondent is to receive conversion fine and to pass orders, such contention cannot be examined by this Court, inasmuch as, deeming provision would no-doubt come into effect after lapse of four months period as indicated under sub-section (5) of Section 95 of the Act. However, as to whether application submitted by the petitioner is accompanied by necessary documents or otherwise cannot be examined by this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and this factual aspect requires to be examined and it would be in the domain of the Deputy Commissioner to undertake such exercise. 4. The learned Addl. Advocate General would submit that application which is now pending before second respondent would be considered and disposed of in accordance with law. His submission is placed on record. 5. Hence, we proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) Writ appeal is hereby allowed. 4. The learned Addl. Advocate General would submit that application which is now pending before second respondent would be considered and disposed of in accordance with law. His submission is placed on record. 5. Hence, we proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) Writ appeal is hereby allowed. (ii) Order dated 29.11.2016 passed in W.P. No. 202682/2016 is hereby set aside. (iii) Respondent-Deputy Commissioner shall consider the application submitted by petitioner on 17.01.2015 by taking into consideration orders passed by this Court in W.P. No. 200764/2015 dated 05.11.2015, W.P. Nos. 200561/2016 and 200013/2017 dated 01.02.2017 and W.A. No. 200383/2015 dated 16.02.2016 and dispose of said application expeditiously, at any rate, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Ordered accordingly.