ORDER : The petitioner herein is claiming ownership to an extent of 3 guntas out of 3 acres 21 guntas in Sy.No.134/2 of Mandya Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mandya Taluk, belonging to its original owner Boregowda, S/o. Huchegowda. According to him, an extent of 2 acres 35 guntas in the total extent of 3 acres 21 guntas belonging to Boregowda was acquired by the State under a notification, thereby indicating that remaining extent of 26 guntas is available with the original land owner. It is stated that in the entire extent of 3 acres 21 guntas in Sy.No.134/2, there is kharab of 10 guntas. Leaving that, the Ain land available is 16 guntas. Out of this 16 guntas, 3 guntas is sold by the original owner to the petitioner herein under registered sale deed dated 10.04.1995. It is seen that even before the said sale deed was executed in favour of petitioner herein, the original owner had initiated proceedings against the State represented by Police Department for the relief of declaration and possession in respect of 16 guntas of land in the said survey number, in which the original owner has succeeded by securing judgment and decree in O.S.No.255/1989 filed by the predecessor in title to the petitioner to the said land. The said judgment was subject matter of appeal in R.A.No.73/1992, which came to be dismissed with cost by judgment dated 17.02.1994. 2. It is stated that thereafter, the original owner has filed Execution Petition in E.P.No.194/1994 and secured possession of 16 guntas of land from the defendants in the aforesaid original suit and subsequently, 3 guntas is sold by the original owner in favour of the petitioner. 3. In respect of the said 3 guntas, an application is filed by the petitioner seeking conversion from agricultural to nonagricultural purpose. Though the said application was filed in the year 2004, the authorities have not considered the same. Instead, the application filed by the petitioner which is in ALN (Misc) 39/200809 is rejected by order dated 28.07.2008, which was subject matter of challenge in Appeal No.179/2016 on the file of Karnataka Appellate Tribunal at Bengaluru (Mysore Camp). It is stated that the said appeal is disposed of with an order of remand and the present remand is not the first of its kind. 4. It is stated that the said appeal is disposed of with an order of remand and the present remand is not the first of its kind. 4. Earlier, there were two more rounds of litigation where remand order was passed and every time when the matter is remanded to Deputy Commissioner for consideration, the same is rejected on one or the other count. 5. On going through the entire material available on record, it is clearly seen that the petitioner herein who is purchaser, has not been successful in convincing the authority to convert the said 3 guntas of land purchased out of 16 guntas of land in Sy.No.134/2 of Mandya village, Kasaba Hobli, Mandya Taluk, from the erstwhile owner, which admittedly is situated adjacent to the quarters of Superintendent of Police. Though the application filed by the petitioner is said to be in order in all other respects, the same is being rejected for one or the other reason by the respondent – Deputy Commissioner denying the order of conversion. In the meanwhile, the appeal which is filed before the KAT is also dismissed directing the petitioner herein to go before the Deputy Commissioner to seek fresh order regarding conversion. 6. If the same is allowed to continue, there will be no end to this. In the fact situation, this court is of the considered opinion when the title of petitioner’s predecessor in title is accepted by the civil court and when all the relevant particulars are furnished for grant of conversion, the Deputy Commissioner should have passed necessary orders for conversion of 3 guntas of land which is standing in the name of petitioner. Hence, the Deputy Commissioner is directed to pass necessary orders granting conversion of the said 3 guntas of land standing in the name of petitioner within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after collecting necessary charges for conversion. With such observation, this writ petition is disposed of.