SRI RAMESH S/O OMKARAPPA AWAJI vs THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17624
WP No. 108181 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020176522026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD

TH
DATED THIS THE 28 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

WRIT PETITION NO. 108181 OF 2026 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

1. SRI RAMESH S/O OMKARAPPA AWAJI
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
PRESIDENT OF TAILORS AND KARMIKARA
SEVA ABHIVRUDDI SANGHA,
B.T. PATIL NAGAR,
ND
2 CROSS, HOSPETE ROAD, KOPPAL 583231.

2. SRI MAHESH S/O YALLAPPA MAKKALLI
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
SECRETARY OF TAILORS AND KARMIKARA
SEVA ABHIVRUDDI SANGHA,
B.T. PATIL NAGAR,
ND
2 CROSS, HOSPETE ROAD,
KOPPAL 583231.

3. SRI. KAMALSAB S/O PEERSAB
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
TREASURER OF TAILORS AND KARMIKARA
SEVA ABHIVRUDDI SANGHA,
ND
B.T. PATIL NAGAR, 2 CROSS,
HOSPETE ROAD, KOPPAL 583231.

Digitally
signed by
SAROJA
HANGARAKI
Location: high
court of
karnataka,
dharwad bench

…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD AKRAM UPPIN, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
DIST. ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING,
NEAR HOSPET ROAD,
KOPPAL 583231.
2. THE JOINT DIRECTOR
DEPT. OF TOWN AND COUNTRY
PLANNING URBAN
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BUILDING,

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17624
WP No. 108181 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020176522026

1ST FLOOR, STATION ROAD,
KALABURAGI 585101.

3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
DEPT. OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING
DIST. ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING,
NEAR HOSPET ROAD,
KOPPAL 583231.

4. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS (ADLR)
D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX,
NEAR HOSPET ROAD,
KOPPAL 583231.

5. PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
GRAM PANCHAYAT OFFICE,
OJANAHALLI, KOPPAL 583231.

6. KOPPAL URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
DIWATOR NAGAR, KOPPAL 583231

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRASHANTH V. MOGALI, HCGP FOR R1 TO R4;
SRI. VIJAYKUMAR BALGERIMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R5;
SRI. RAJASHEKHAR R. GUNJALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R6)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE
CONSTITION OFI INDIA, PRAYING TO, ISSUE A WRIT IN THE
NATURE OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING THE IMPUGNED
COMMUNICATION BEARING NO .
£ÀUÁæAiÉÆÃ¸À¤PÉÆ/«£Áå¸À/ªÀiÁ»w/2026-27/491
DATED 07.04.2026 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-
M AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17624
WP No. 108181 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020176522026

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

ORAL ORDER

1. The petitioners are the office-bearers of the Tailors and
Karmikara Seva Abhivruddhi Sangha, a registered society
under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960. The
society is stated to have been established for the social
and economic welfare of the tailoring community and
economically weaker sections of society. The society
claims to have purchased land bearing Sy.No.72/1,
measuring 2 acres 28 guntas, and its name is stated to
have been mutated in the revenue records pursuant to
the order dated 23.12.2025.

2. The petitioners submitted a proposal seeking approval of
a residential layout in respect of the aforesaid land before
respondent No.5-Gram Panchayat. Respondent No.5
forwarded the proposal to respondent No.3 for technical
scrutiny. Respondent No.3, by communication dated
21.01.2026, called upon the petitioners to furnish certain
documents. The petitioners claim to have complied with
the requirements. Thereafter, respondent No.3 called

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17624
WP No. 108181 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020176522026

upon respondent No.4-Assistant Director of Land Records
to furnish the survey report in respect of the subject land.

3. Respondent No.3 issued a demand notice dated
07.03.2026 calling upon the petitioners to pay scrutiny
and layout approval fees of ₹16,070/- and an additional
amount of ₹5,870/-. The petitioners claim to have paid
the aforesaid amounts.

4. In the meanwhile, the State Government issued a
notification dated 17.03.2026 at Annexure-L under
Section 4A(1) of the Karnataka Town and Country
Planning Act, 1961, extending the Koppal Local Planning
Area to include 11 additional villages, including Chilawadi
Village, wherein the subject land is situated.

5. Paragraph 2 of the said notification, which is relevant for
consideration of the controversy involved in the present
petition, reads as under:
“2. «¸ÀÛjvÀ ¸ÀÜ½ÃAiÀÄ AiÉÆÃd£Á ¥ÀæzÉÃ±ÀzÀ°è£À d«ÄÃ£ÀÄUÀ½UÉ
¸ÀA§AzsÀ¥ÀlÖAvÉ ¸ÀPÁðgÀªÀÅ ºÉÆgÀr¹gÀÄªÀ DzÉÃ±ÀUÀ¼ÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ ¸ÀÜ½ÃAiÀÄ
AiÉÆÃd£Á ¥ÀæzÉÃ±À «¸ÀÛj¹ DzÉÃ±À ºÉÆgÀr¹zÀ ¥ÀÇªÀðzÀ°è PÀAzÁAiÀÄ
E¯ÁSÉ¬ÄAzÀ ¨sÀÆ ¥ÀjªÀwð¸À®Ä ºÉÆgÀr¹zÀ ZÁ°ÛAiÀÄ°ègÀÄªÀ DzÉÃ±ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß
ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀPÀëªÀÄ ¥Áæ¢üPÁgÀ¢AzÀ ¥ÀqÉzÀ «£Áå¸À C£ÀÄªÉÆÃzÀ£É C£ÀÄ¸ÁgÀ PÀlÖqÀ
PÀlÖ®Ä ¥ÁægÀA©üPÀ ¥ÀæªÀiÁt ¥ÀvÀæ ¤ÃqÀ®Ä ¥ÀjUÀtÂ¸ÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.”

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17624
WP No. 108181 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020176522026

6. Subsequent to the issuance of the aforesaid notification,
respondent No.2 issued the impugned communication
dated 07.04.2026, returning the proposal submitted by
the petitioners on the ground that Chilawadi Village had
been brought within the expanded Koppal Local Planning
Area and, therefore, the proposal could not be further
processed by the authority which had earlier been
considering it. The said communication is called in
question in the present petition.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
paragraph 2 of the notification dated 17.03.2026 protects
the proposals which were already under consideration
before the concerned authorities prior to the expansion
of the Local Planning Area. It is contended that the
petitioners had submitted the layout proposal much prior
to the issuance of the notification and that the proposal
had already undergone substantial scrutiny, including
calling for and obtaining the survey report from
respondent No.4. It is further submitted that the
petitioners had also paid the prescribed scrutiny and

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17624
WP No. 108181 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020176522026

other charges. Therefore, it is contended that respondent
No.2 could not have returned the proposal without
considering the protection available under paragraph 2 of
the notification.

8. Per contra, learned HCGP submits that paragraph 2 of the
notification protects only those lands which had already
been converted and layouts in respect of which approval
or permission to commence development had already
been granted. It is contended that the said paragraph
does not extend to applications for layout approval which
were merely pending consideration and had not
culminated in the grant of approval. Therefore,
respondent No.2 was justified in returning the proposal,
as the subject village had come within the jurisdiction of
the expanded Koppal Local Planning Area.

9. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6 submits
that, consequent upon the expansion of the Koppal Local
Planning Area, respondent No.6 is the competent
authority to consider the proposal in respect of the
subject land. It is further submitted that, if the

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17624
WP No. 108181 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020176522026

petitioners approach respondent No.6 with the necessary
documents, their proposal would be considered in
accordance with law.

10. Heard and perused the records.

11. There is no dispute that the petitioners had
submitted an application seeking approval of the
residential layout before respondent No.5 and that the
proposal was forwarded to respondent No.3 for technical
scrutiny. It is also not in dispute that certain documents
were called for, a survey report was sought from
respondent No.4 and the petitioners were called upon to
pay the prescribed fees, which they claim to have paid.

12. The question that arises for consideration is
whether the petitioners can claim the benefit of
paragraph 2 of the notification dated 17.03.2026 on the
ground that their proposal for layout approval was
pending consideration before the issuance of the
notification.

13. A perusal of paragraph 2 of the notification
extracted hereinabove indicates that the protection

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17624
WP No. 108181 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020176522026

contemplated therein is confined to the categories of
lands and permissions specifically referred to in the said
paragraph. The said provision does not extend such
protection to an application for approval of a layout which
was still pending consideration and in respect of which no
final approval had been granted by the competent
authority.

14. The mere submission of an application, payment of
scrutiny fees or completion of certain procedural steps
would not, by itself, confer any vested right upon the
petitioners to claim consideration of the proposal by the
erstwhile authority, notwithstanding the subsequent
expansion of the Local Planning Area. Therefore, the
contention of the petitioners that their pending proposal
is protected under paragraph 2 of the notification cannot
be accepted.

15. In view of the expansion of the Koppal Local
Planning Area under the notification dated 17.03.2026,
the subject land having come within the expanded
planning area, respondent No.6 is the competent

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17624
WP No. 108181 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020176522026

authority to consider the petitioners' proposal in
accordance with law. In that view of the matter, the
communication issued by respondent No.2 returning the
proposal cannot be faulted.

16. However, having regard to the fact that the
petitioners had already submitted the proposal and had
undertaken certain procedural steps before the issuance
of the notification, it would be appropriate to direct
respondent No.6 to consider the proposal from the stage
at which the notification dated 17.03.2026 was issued,
subject to the petitioners furnishing the necessary
documents and complying with the requirements of law.

17. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with
the following directions:
ORDER

(i) Petitioner shall make necessary
application to respondent No.6 within 15
days from the date of receipt of certified
copy of the order.

- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17624
WP No. 108181 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020176522026

(ii) In addition, respondent No.5-Panchayat
Development Officer shall ensure that
relevant records/file relating to the
petitioners' application, which was
returned to the petitioners, is forwarded
to respondent No.6 within a period of 15
days from the date of receipt of a copy of
this order.

(iii) Respondent No.6 shall consider the
petitioners' application from the stage at
which the notification dated 17.03.2026
was issued and proceed to examine the
same in accordance with law.

(iv) The amounts of ₹16,070/- and ₹5,870/-
already paid by the petitioners towards
scrutiny and other charges shall be given
credit while processing the application by
respondent No.6. If any further amount
is payable under the applicable rules, the
petitioners shall pay the same.

- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17624
WP No. 108181 of 2026

CNR: KAHC020176522026

(v) The petitioners shall furnish such further
documents and particulars as may be
required by respondent No.6 for
consideration of the application.

(vi) Respondent No.6 shall expedite
consideration of the application and pass
appropriate orders in accordance with
law, preferably within an outer limit of
four months from the date of receipt of
the file.

(vii) All contentions of the parties are kept
open to be urged before the competent
authority.

Sd/-
(M.G.S. KAMAL)
JUDGE

VB/Ct-cmu/LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 44