- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:11466 WP No. 16660 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 16660 OF 2024 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI NAGENDRA RAO R TERADAL S/O RAJAPPA TERADAL AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS, R/AT RENUKANILAYA, PENSION MOHALLA, 1ST CROSS, CHIKKAMANGALORE - 577 101 REP. BY GPA HOLDER SRI MANJUNATH N TERADAL S/O NAGENDRA RAO R TERADAL AGED 52 YEARS, R/AT RENUKANILAYA, PENSION MOHALLA, 1ST CROSS, CHIKKAMANGALORE - 577 101 … PETITIONER (BY SRI. VARUN SAI Y., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, M S BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101 Digitally signed by PRAKASH N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:11466 WP No. 16660 of 2024 3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CHIKKAMAGALURU SUB DIVISION, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101 4. TAHSILDAR CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101 5. CHIKKAMAGALURU URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, KALAYANAGAR, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 102 … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; SRI A. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT AND QUASH/SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 01.06.2024 AT ANNEXURE-K PASSED BY THE R-5 BEARING NO. KRA.SAM.NAAPRACHI.A.V.N.M/2024-25/252 AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER The petitioner has sought for setting aside of the endorsement at Annexure-K dated 01.06.2024, whereby the 5th respondent-Chikkamagaluru Urban Development Authority has rejected the petitioner's application for residential layout plan with respect to 00-32 guntas of - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:11466 WP No. 16660 of 2024 land in Sy.No.69 of Basavanahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Chikkamagaluru Taluk and District. The endorsement is to the effect that petitioner had obtained conversion of agricultural land for non-agriculture purpose i.e., Dairy and residential purpose in Sy.No.69 for an extent of 1 Acre 21 Guntas and the Deputy Commissioner had not demarcated the extent of residential use as well as extent of land for Dairy use separately in the order of conversion. Accordingly, the authority has called upon the petitioner to get fresh order of conversion demarcating residential and dairy purpose separately upon which they would consider sanction of plan. 2. The order of conversion at Annexure-A is unambiguous and provides for residential use stipulated at Sl.No.1 to 7 would clearly indicate that conversion was essentially for residential purpose. The subject in the said order of conversion dated 05.10.1980 appears to be by oversight as it refers to conversion for residential as well as dairy. Even otherwise, once the competent authority - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:11466 WP No. 16660 of 2024 has converted the land for residential use and petitioner seeks for grant of layout plan for residential purpose, the endorsement at Annexure-A could not have been issued. 3. Accordingly, the endorsement at Annexure-A is set aside. The 5th respondent is to consider grant of approval for residential purpose taking note of the observation made above without insisting for any further clarification in the order of conversion as long as other formalities relating to sanction of plan are fulfilled. 4. The petition stands disposed off accordingly. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE NP