- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1068 WP No. 108604 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.108604 OF 2025 (KLR-CON) BETWEEN: SHRI SACHIN PRABHAKAR BICHU AGE 57 YEARS, OCC ADVOCATE R/O. PLOT NO.1075, RANADE COLONY HINDWADI, BELAGAVI-590011. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. TEJPAL A KAMAL, ADVOCATE) AND: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BELAGAVI-590001. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. NANDINI B.SOMAPUR, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-F, F1 AND F2 AND TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO GRANT THE CONVERSION OF LAND BEARING RS NO.52/3, 52/9 AND 52/10 OF BELAGAVI INTO NON-AGRICULTURAL LAND CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING-B GROUP 1, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA MANJANNA E Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2026.02.02 10:02:36 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1068 WP No. 108604 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA) The petitioner has called in question the endorsement order dated 31.07.2025, whereby the respondent rejected the petitioner’s application seeking conversion. Further, the petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to grant conversion of the land belonging to the petitioner into non-agricultural use by considering the petitioner’s application. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent-State. 3. The petitioner submitted an application seeking conversion of lands bearing RS No.52/3, RS No.52/9, and RS No.52/10 of Belagavi for non-agricultural purposes. The said application was rejected by a one-line order placing reliance on the report of the Commissioner (BUDA) dated 31.07.2025. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1068 WP No. 108604 of 2025 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent rejected the application without verifying the relevant documents and solely based on the report submitted by the Commissioner (BUDA). It is further submitted that the impugned endorsement order is cryptic, not providing any findings or reasons for rejecting the petitioner’s application for conversion of land, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Sharadabai w/o Chandrakant Janmane vs The Deputy Commissioner Dharwad1 wherein, under similar circumstances, an identical order passed by the Deputy Commissioner was quashed. He also relies upon another decision in the case of Ms. Swapna Prakash Desai Vs The Deputy Commissioner2. 1 WP No.100442/2022 (20.04.2022) 2 WP No.103398/2025 (DD 10.06.2025) - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1068 WP No. 108604 of 2025 6. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that, though the online order reflects that the rejection in one line order, the Deputy Commissioner has passed a reasoned order rejecting the petitioner’s application. 7. This Court has carefully considered the contentions urged and perused the material on record. 8. Though the learned Additional Government Advocate submits that a reasoned order has been passed, there is no material forthcoming to demonstrate that the Deputy Commissioner has in fact, passed any reasoned order while rejecting the petitioner’s application. Even assuming for a moment that a reasoned order has been passed, the same ought to have been on the official portal and communicated to the petitioner which has not been done. 9. Under these circumstances, it is evident that the Deputy Commissioner without following the proper - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1068 WP No. 108604 of 2025 procedure of law and without verifying the documents has passed the impugned endorsement. 10. Accordingly, this Court passed the following; ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. ii. The impugned endorsement order dated 31.07.2025 (Annexure-F, F1 and F2) insofar as they relate to the petition properties (Annexures-A, A1 and A2), are hereby quashed. iii. Mandamus is issued directing the respondent to reconsider the application of the petitioner filed for conversion of land in accordance with law and pass a reasoned order within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Sd/- JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA AM/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51