Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 60872 (KAR)

SRI.A. KRISHNARAJU v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/105433/2016 · 2025-12-01

M Nagaprasanna

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16901 WP No. 105433 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 105433 OF 2016 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. A. KRISHNARAJU S/O LATE A.ANANTHARAJU AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT NO.173, 2ND WARD, JANATHA FLAT, HAMPI, HOSPET, BALLARI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRINIVAS B. NAIK, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT KANNADA AND CULTURE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANASOUDHA, BANGALURU. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BELLARY DISTRICT BALLARI. 3. THE HAMPI WORLD HERITAGE AREA MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY, HAMPI, HOSPET TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 4. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA HAMPI, HOSPET TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDING ARCHAELOGIST Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16901 WP No. 105433 of 2016 5. DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY, MUSEUMS AND HERITAGE, OPP. KAMAL MAHAL, HAMPI-KAMALAPUR, HOSPET TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY DIRECTOR. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, AGA; SRI. PRASHANT F. GOUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI. M.B KANAVI, CGSC FOR R4 AND R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO: i) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE ENDORSEMENT BEARING NO.ºÀ«¥À¥À椥Áæ/ºÉÆ ºÀ«¥À¥À椥Áæ/ºÉÆ ºÀ«¥À¥À椥Áæ/ºÉÆ ºÀ«¥À¥À椥Áæ/ºÉÆ 22/02/2014-15/114 DATED 30.04.2015 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT (ANNEXURE - S). ii) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION DIRECTING THE 2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENTS HEREIN TO GRANT PERMISSION/NOC TO THE PETITIONER TO CONVERT THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY FROM AGRICULTURAL TO RESIDENTIAL USE. iii) DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO PAY THE COSTS OF THIS PETITION AND GRANT SUCH OTHER AND FURTHER RELIEFS AS ARE JUST THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16901 WP No. 105433 of 2016 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following prayer: i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing the endorsement bearing No. 22/02/2014-15/114 dated 30.04.2015 issued by the 3rd respondent (ANNEXURE - S). ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents herein to grant permission/NOC to the petitioner to convert the Schedule Property from agricultural to residential use. iii) Direct the respondents to pay the costs of this petition and grant such other and further reliefs as are just. 2. The learned counsel Sri.Prashant Gaudar representing the respondent No.3 submits that the petitioner has an alternate remedy as is held by the Co-ordinate Bench. The Co-ordinate Bench in Writ Petition No.104378/2022 disposed off on 11th January 2024 has held as follows: “1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a) Issue any appropriate Writ, Order or Direction including a writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned endorsement dated 16.11.2018 bearing No. HaViPaPraNiPra/Ho/08/2018-19/915 addressed by the Respondent Authority to the Petitioner, vide Annexure-K to the Writ Petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16901 WP No. 105433 of 2016 b) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondent to issue NOC for conversion of land from Agricultural to Residential purposes as sought by the Petitioner vide application dated 22.08.2011 which is produced herewith as Annexure-C. c) To pass any other order under the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity. 2. The petitioner had approached the respondent for issuance of No Objection Certificate (NOC) in terms of Section 14 of the Hampi World Heritage Area Management Authority Act, 2002. Vide endorsement dated 16.11.2018 at Annexure-K, the said request has been rejected by the State Government on the ground that the land comes within the core area, the access road is only 3.5 meters in width and that any construction would obstruct the view of the Virupaksha Temple in Hampi. It is aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 3. In furtherance of the 1972 UNESCO World Heritage Convention, certain areas have been declared as world heritage sites. It is in furtherance thereof that the Hampi World Heritage Area Management Authority has been constituted, requiring no objection from the said authority for any development in the lands coming under its jurisdiction. Apart there from, the zonal regulations of Hampi require various permissions including that from ASI, Archaeological Survey of India etc for development. 4. If at all the petitioner is aggrieved by refusal of the NOC sought for under Section 14 (1) of the Hampi World Heritage Management Authority Act, 2002 there is an appellate remedy provided under Section 14(5) of the Hampi World Heritage Management Authority Act, 2002, and it is for the State Government to exercise its discretion in the matter taking into consideration the designation of the area as a world heritage site, which this Court would not be in a position to do. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16901 WP No. 105433 of 2016 5. Hence, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file necessary appeal under Section 14(5) of the Hampi World Heritage Management Authority Act, 2002, which shall be considered by the appellate authority in accordance with all applicable laws the petition stands dismissed.” 3. In the light of the issue standing covered by the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court (supra), on all its fours and on the same reasons, the subject petition also stands disposed reserving liberty to the petitioner to file necessary appeal under Section 14(5) of the Hampi World Heritage Management Authority Act, 2002, which shall be considered by the Appellate Authority in accordance with all applicable laws. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE KGK CT:ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 165