IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BA%§f;C"Ah'REW
DATED THES THE 6"' DAY OF OCTOBER, 2010
BEFORE
THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.v.sHYLENI)I2A KUMAH ffij A '
W.P.No. 9819/2008 {LA--F:<ES}jE..:'
BETWEEN: V'
SR1. B.R.PA'I'HI,
s/o LATE SMT. R.RAMARATHNAM1wA' *
& SR1. B.S.RAJAGOPALA 2
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS.
R/AT No.4, 7TH CROSS... E
KATRIGUPPE, I
BANGALORE--560_QL_5._. _ :v--v..'..I5}13§T'I'l'IONI+3R
{BY SR1. ARAVIND. ADif.;;I«fo'I?' I. V
SR1. P.M.NAr~I.I.AV'I1EDI;w;¥ at-s_RI. S.C;BHUTI, ADVS.]
AND: '- '
1. THE SPECIAL LANDAGTQUISITION
OFFICER,' NA'l'IONAL HIGH WAYS
FOR HIGH WAY. N__Q.7,
- A -- HOSUR ROAD,
*
' .;BAHGA.LoRE_1.. 560 002.
2.'
s /Q "B, K. LAKSHMAIAH,
AGEQWMAJOR.
- B.L.BABU.
V s/0 13.K.LAKsHMAIAH,
AGED MAJOR.
4. SRI. B.L.SOI\/IASHEKAR,
S/O B.K.LAKSHMAIAH,
AGE-D MAJOR.
5. SR}. E.L.RAJSHEKAR,
S/O B.K.I..AKSI-IMAIAH,
AGED MAJOR.
6. SR}. B.L.SANTI-IANA KRISHNA,
S/O B.K.LAKSI-IMAIAH, *
AGED MAJOR.
RESPONDENTS 2 TO 6 ARE ALL
R/AT BOMMANAHALLI VILLAGE; "-»
BEGUR I-IOBLI, "
I-IOSUR MAIN ROAD, " _
BANGALORE SOUTH_T_A'LUKI_ "
7. BANGALORE CIHY CO-OPERATIVE' BANK,
BANGALOR; 560 0.18.3 I * I
REP, ..BY_I'1"S_ MP;N4AG.ER_ ' RESPONDENTS
(BY SR1, N;B.'.IISEWAI~IA*rI1;" AGA FOR R1
SRI.'«SUDEEP,'A:)v'.'--~FOR~"
M/S SING-HA1*E_LA'&"PARTNERS, ADVS. FOR R1
SR1. B.C';S_EETI-IARAMA RAO, ADV. FOR R7
, 'R2 "F0 5 SERVED,
- .I._N'Oi'I'ICE fro R6 I-IELD SUFFICIENT}
. PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASI-I
DATED 4.1.2007 {ANNEXURE -- B) AND THE
'H.«,_I*.,ORDER_DATED 27.5.2008 (ANNEXURE MD) ISSUED BY THE
V " xRAI.=__AS SAME IS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND IN
OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR FURTHER
I I}: " "ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING;
ORDER
Issue ruie.
2. This matter has come up for
3. The order passed by »(1:0Lir’:._T
reads as under : it 1 l l A
“This writ petition} listed’-Jfor ‘talting
steps in respect ufnserved” 6’5″
respondent. ‘I t l ‘ = . 7’n\O . that 6″”
responClen’t.___ -fjfesidiznlce at
Bomrn lie; Beau Hobli,
is the same
2 to 5, who are
all VlllbroihersVA’.oj’«.:.u~”d6i”* respondent, being
.. lclhiidrenll hmaiah, are residing.
Resporidents 2 to 5 are served but are not
repfrepselnvtéd.
In the circumstances, learned
V ” _counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo
for holding service on 63* respondent as
sufficient as the notice issued to 6m
respondent has been returned with postal
shara “no such person” and “address
insufficient” on two different occassions
when notice was sought to be served on”*—_
him, where as his brothers respondents?’jbbtjd-.
to 5 have been served at
address and acknowledgeITLerits”1::’_’;v
having received notices: if them,’ :;_t
available in Court records.
In the circurrzs.ta:fnces_,g’ se’rv1.’cef of
notice on 6th respicéndegntjis ‘4f’i£fld’S.L1_fl’iCi€nf.
iS;’su:,ed.= perusal of the
passed by
V Acquisition
rnore illegality and
evena . possibie’fraudulent order being
_§C’passed”‘ the first respondent to the
of the petitioner and for
it -VVierii’ichiiig.?respondents 2 to 6, particularly
” 6″? respondent.
Even while there was a dispute and
tithe matter was required to be referred to
the Civil Court for resolution of the dispute,
the Land Acquisition Officer has ventured
to determine the entire entitlement on his
5
own and to the exclusion of the petitioner
held that respondents 2 to 6 are entitled to-.___
receive the entire compensation arriou_’rIet.:’f«..t_:”‘«V
which is not a small sum. Therefore{§rfirs’tp:*i:{T
respondent is directed to be pres_ent–ljefore
the Court along with :_
10-2010, as requested
Government _’
Furnish copy” larder. go
teamed –.
4. Writ.-petition for quashing
Amerugg dead dated 4.1.2007) and
Annexi1re”–D order dated 27.5.2008) and
for fnrtherléanaendment “to direct the 15′ respondent — the
Acqiiisition Officer, National High Ways for
Bangalore , to refer the dispute between
the-pet.itiori’er — the owner and respondents 2 to 7.
A. 5;’ “On the other hand, the Civil Court has resolved
“question as to the entitlement and apportionment of
“”eompensation payable in respect of the 5 guntas of
6
land, which has a superstructured measuring about
506 Sq. nits. in Sy. No.3 of Bomrnanahalii ViI1age,’e’f3’egur
Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, in respect
first respondent had determined the–«
payable to the land owner:
Rs.79,59,961/–. :
6. In terms of An’r1e”xure– “v.£fV.Vai”fZ’L “dated
04.01.2007 passed th’ed””Sp.:é4cia1-._LandV”AcVquisition
Officer and Authorised effect to in
terms of fu1’ti’:«epr* order (copy at
Ar1ne2:§1_A1re~’I)V7VVt’c.’i;hefpetiti’o.n’) passed by the Special Land
Acquisition’ hf’-;1.I4t1’1OI’iS(3C1 Officer copy of which
is pfiodiiced at”Annexure~D to the petition, wherein, the
‘petitioners’4arrayed as parties claimants in the foliowing
order against the present respondents 2 to 6
(Mr; .]3V”l«:_,..SVridhar, Mr.B.L.Babu, Mr. B.L.Somashekar,
A If/fr0.’B;.L.Rajshekar, Mr.B.L.Santhana Krishna) to this
0. petition as rivais to the proceedings in the following
order.
7. Under this order, the Special Land Acquisition
Officer, purporting to resoive the competing Veiaims
between the petitioner and the responptiente:ffor
entitiement and apportionment of the
amount in respect of 5 gunta;3″‘of’i.an§:1, of
which the compensation is fa
Rs.”/9,59,961/– in terms of tii.e:”awart1
. ea¢3é.§”yve–:’j4 _ ‘
a~uj,.@_,mabc; 30333 ~ ttnogrseaigx nmaa
a”rici)a?/0053′) a5rt$riVpC3.§a’Jarfi(j.§;;’5..V s9:§Ae;2o;%f5;ajg;’~V–ég§r:3a03)r% zéorigirado
_c:5z§,_m ~251°’rfi0cii)_ f7E)fiIi)C5 X1560.
soc; oaogqfe 506 23.m°. (0-05
mow) imaged 2,332.25 9%» geaoeasc
a5,saasas0.;2s;9z3it’;i;>a5::,m 0i2¢aJae-aevs’ea)§_m0veaa:oa).
V nar.:i><:5.«_%.;de:3£"~ m}f,mé'_=.. éaggéi 9055530 aboawafiri 5-déaoci 5503
:scx.j' ' V' "£2300 '- n. was ~.
adaasao aria?) caaroaciaidi 531933
sfiaxidiaijaia
= zuocziéd
1 7959951-00 a3.cJe>=i®_,,e:;3of, 5309951 seamen?
mg.» * ‘gs.-«:m;;;'(o– a.me:v*.a3aw, eaamjajcjos
A V. .05;-kboaé) a0.oJe1v”g’irara’i>a’e9.>0°”, same
5510.34 z3.oJc:=f.0a2:a5mo€ 5035 mass
‘adv. aka. 23.930″ :5030a5z3§c1 23900/idatigi.
9-9
95 0
(ifc?.R503 +
aarba
éegpaé
aioriéaada ms ans» 1650000. e3.oar3é’ri5″a€@°’o
eaadcieésw’ 21305036′, ace’
530:; aimazfa) axe, aormcig ma
2J95?33U9?:# 0
a –}w>e’)V
. &m_tj)&jaOC3«_ _.
ado;-_5.~’ mg
306 10.50 5%,
d/arieéaigi
wmcfflaérgfio
as agaréé
_ ‘ macaw ‘ ‘
3 $
30330132: 0093
afiowaci 4,
.:~39wéXu5é,1z:i>.
aa;e¢5m5;: §é.fic:5 afioaaaoaiig
cmafiézien t:;§dra%»_%ii§;=§,, _ u ”
to Engiishz Compensation
in reepetii” of 506 Sq. mts. (5 guntas) to
~1′?:3v;’_i,.Ba¥:>u, B.L.Somasheka__r,_ B.L.Rajshekar,
Krishna are entitled for a sum of
/- in total. Bangalore City Co–operative
A Chaznarajpet, Barzgaiere, is entitled for sum of
t …R§,.18,50,000/~ be-mg amount that the bank can claim
V due to the loan raised by one Mr. B.L.Ganesh -on the
security of the property and therefore, the said amount
representing his share in the compensation amount in
respect of 5 guntas of land acquired is to
to the Bank.
9. The above order
petitioner amongst clairnan-ts’ .
applicants /claimants in the l– /NH-
7/BHRC/CR/29/O6aO’7iV:d’.–d’ate§:l:} [copy at
Annexure–D the it even Without
seeking resolution by a civil
court of sub–section [4] of
section 3H.__of the I\aTation:al4Highways Act, 1956 [for short
, _ ‘the reading .as___u.nder:
it fie-posit and payment of amount —
[4_}” any dispute arises as to the
apportionment of the amount or any part
.A thereof or to any person to whom the same
V “-.or any part thereof is payable, the
V’ competent authority shall refer the dispute
to the decision of the principal civil court of
original jurisdiction within the limits of
whose jurisdiction the land is situated.”
10
and the writ petitioner being left high and dry by this
course of action claiming that the petitioner has no
other remedy to redress the injury, namely,.._.lth.te’
denial of the compensation to which _
entitled to in law being son of
along with one B R Sampanlgiramaiahi.
Srinivasagupta [claimants fl special
land acquisition the petition for the
relief as noticed_above,.– ‘
10. EIn’e;fgenti1._notiee issued to the
resporidents.. are all served.
_-11. ‘respcriclent — special land acquisition
‘A if *”Whoi.was represented initially by the Additional
*-.(.lever1irnentf’jAdvocate, is now represented by M/s.
Partners and Mr. Sudeep, Advocate
Vp”appears–‘ for the first respondent, who has now come up
‘as”‘s*accessor to the Additional Government Advocate
“who was appearing for the special land acquisition
officer earlier and who it appears is now Advocate for
11
the first respondent for the reason that the National
Highway Authorities for whose benefit the
was being acquired, namely, for the
construction of ‘elevated highwayiand it
way on the National Highway
Bangalore Hosur Highway the VNat.iojnal’-miiighwaylV’V
who were earlier dep’enden.t”‘ori._:’the__State”Government
and its special land purpose of
acquisition for appears having
now of their own officers
and the officers from the
State (as by the use of the
revenue ofticiais)..»the’- revenue department may be they
V. –Ahad’–bu»1’nt”‘their and had a bitter experience.
i ” 1v.’.?V..’ vvith this background and in this state of
ihave heard both Mr. N B Vishwanath, learned
it ‘v~:i_”Avddi’t_iona1 Government Advocate who had filed power
for the first respondent earlier and Mr. Sudeep, learned
counsel who appears for first respondent as of now.
12
13. Be that as it may, some of the other
respondents though served have remained absent.
While the seventh respondent is representedppbj
Seetharama Rao, learned Advocate is not H
14. It is in this background’, thejrnatter:ilhatlbofiie
up before this court earlier”‘*-and the as’-it
indicated in the beginning oVf.th;is._oi’der. .’
is 15. Mr. pSeenapp:l’a._ special land
acquisition ?_oft’it;j:ser .\’%;rho:_ “has passed the order at
Annexure’–D.:’:ivf,i_S the court and has
furnished his and particulars which is
alsorfitceived kept the record of the writ petition.
~ 1.Seenappa G V has stated that he has been
t1’ansferre§i’:’ touthe office of the Deputy Commissioner,
Childtaballapur and now it is attached to the Urban
V’ f”IAA)pe\dfelopment Cell of Chikkaballapur Town with the
designation ‘Project Director’ and has been functioning
so for the past about two years; that he had continued
as a special land acquisition officer till November 2008
13
and thereafter he is working in the office of the Deputy
Commissioner, Chikkaballapur. V
17. With regard to the
special land acquisition officer_,sta_tes ‘
remember the details at this
records are looked into.l»-Ielfowever, i
learned Additional ll,_%\dV’Q§atel,’ whdihad filed
power earlier pleads not-‘._available today
and given before the
court.
Thevfspecialylaiid acquisition officer was
directedbefore the court only for the
rea’sor1_°that the-e___manner of disbursement of a huge
‘ ,i_l_l1″Il’iQE7A.1i’l_tV”‘Clf.’:.RS.79,59,961/W in favour of only a few
persons, too who had figured as rivals in the
application filed by as many as seven persons amongst
A “ll figured the petitioner as fifth applicant and to the
exclusion of all private applicants except for the
Manager, City Co–operative Bank Limited, Bangalore
§;//r
14
who has been apportioned a sum of Rs.16,50,000/– as
the amount belonging to one B L Ganesh who again
figured as second respondent or a second rival in7t_he
application, only indicates that the entire’_.:§rnoungt
been disbursed in favour of .pers_o’ns”*–figuring as”
rivals to the determination dated.27;’,’_5:fl7.008
in favour of the applicaIilts’~.though_’ inu..of the-if
statutory provisions noticed.-aboveguthe ‘disbursement of
the amount should have’awaited’:’determination by the
civil court it ofwthe special land
acquisition” to,:have_ll'”referred the matter for
resolution’– whereas the special land
acquisition” officer himself embarked upon such
= detennfina’tion andleven disbursement.
‘ V . l course of action is not contemplated in
the detriment of the petitioner and others
who were applicants before the special land acquisition
officer in the proceedings dated 27.5.2008, naturally
wereates an impression of the special land acquisition
officer acting in a hasty and preemptive manner to the
15
detriment of the petitioner and possibly due to any
collusion between the special land acquisition’
and the beneficiaries who have received the~’.arnou.r1tl§” —
20. Mr. Seenappa, the speciiallland~..lacdui’sitie:gn
officer who is before the.7cQ.urtVlh,as statedjvthVatl3
amount has been disbursed bylhthelvspeicial land
acquisition officer the authorities by
means of cheques rn’ade::’oyer_’,t’o ..li:h.e:’»’lrespondents in
._fur’tli’er determination dated
terms of
27-5-29.08’lV{‘Ckj’p3’5Z;::’ ,at–..j’Agr1he:§1:ire-5D] and this is the
deveIoprncnt.’for further details he Wili
have to referllto the records.
ye ‘fh.i_s exercising the power of judicial
o_f,el\«’i’_9’V’.’l7 ad_rrii.riistrative action will only look into the
orders ..passed by the administrative authorities and
]qi1a_si judicial authorities as to the legality and the
-_t’c_nability of such orders and will not normally embark
it ‘on either enquiring into the conduct and manner of
5 functioning of such officials nor is it necessary for other
16
quasi judicial functionary to appear before this court
and explain the manner of conducting the proceedings,
as a quasi judicial function is not
administrative function but is a
with a judicial determination b7Lit”i’_)’yi«
functionary. In such a situation;-the
functionary has to act
provisions and nothin:g~~»else’;ff 1, .
22.. Yet another:_’pecui,ia.r ‘aspect this case which
is obvious,’ V ‘ is passed by the
predecessor “f name C. Mohammed
Kaieemuiiaht, land acquisition officer
an_di,further ordenisv passed by the successor special
officer, namely, Seenappa G V., Who is
present’ beforefthe court today.
.. While the award per se cannot be found fault
_’ witii”as it is a determination of compensation in respect
“of lands acquired, in the absence of a further reference
sought to the civil court for enhancement etc., there is
17
no need to quash this award per se whether the award
is passed bona fide or otherwise.
24. While the award if not
necessary to examine the ”
the award is passed by the then’»,spe’cial
officer as the whole proceedings
possible favoritism, llvictirrlizration of
persons like the petitioner..
25. Inf’ order dated
27 land acquisition officer
is r1otVll”suustaina_blle’w.liri..;_:laI.rV at all as the entitlement
between the petitionerlllland other competitors should
‘l V. ‘~haVVel:.be”en l’i’esolVedmonly by the civil court and not by the
A*~special..lfiand’-_-acquisition officer. Therefore, it is
inevitable quash the order at Annexure–D by issue of
it writ of certiorari.
26. Therefore while writ petition is allowed and
rule is made absolute, it is further necessary to ensure
awareness to the manner in which said proceedings go
18
on and particularly in the matter of land acquisition
proceedings and the further manner of identifyiwngfiihe
persons who are entitled for receiving
apportionment if there are competing .clairn_s etc…’ in
27. As this court is to
enquiry nor is it petition on
board only for such General of
this court is directed””‘t’o.- of this order
along the Karnataka
to hold an
inquiry’ under which the said
awards ltol’l3ev.l::_ll.passed by the special land
, g_ acqdisiti’on oflic’er,.._.a.I1d also in the matter of determining
the -.confipe_nsat.ion to the land owners whose land had
to facqnired in the context of the scheme known
as constrnction of ‘elevated highway and six lane
A way on the National Highway No.7 at 8.50
kilometer’ on Bangalore I-Iosur Highway.
19
28. The Karnataka Lokayukta also to enquire into
the conduct of the special land acquisition
had passed the Award and also into the
bona fides of the special land aciquisitiorig V
passed the order at Annexure–D1zVandA*A.to
to its logical conclusion, to”-«a:scertaiIi._if
development, misconduct course
of such enquiry. l _ l l h l
29. The”:rrjatt<3:if is A the Karnataka
Lokayuktal notice of the
level such acquisition
proceedings exchequer being drained at
the cost of it the 'State and the citizens, to 'enrich the
priyate persons whether they are entitled to
l"sucl1gconipensa'tion or otherwise and bona fide users of
land, who the reai land owners are being left in the
gluyrch 'while trespassers, outsiders, tricksters are
igcolnferred with bounties by the special land acquisition
"officer by misusing and abusing their power in an
arbitrary and whimsical manner.
20
30. It is for this reason, the matter requires
further enquiry, investigation, scrutiny and examination
at the hands of the Karnataka Lokayukta, to tallieupthe
proceedings to its logical conclusion.
31. If any such misconduct Ki
found about said land
open to the State Government
personaily from them if to the
beneficiaries or the the misuse or
abuse of poweriby officers.
is that the first respondent
should amount already disbursed in
fav.vour..tVAof.v_ the ‘lire-spondents is recovered and kept in
the civil court, to abide by the
by the civil court for the entitlement
amongst the Various persons who figured in the order
dated 27.5.2008 [copy at Annexure W D to the writ
petition].
21
33. A writ of mandamus is issued to the first
respondent — special land acquisition officer to refer the
matter to the civil court in terms of subwsect’ion’v.of
section 3-H of the Act and the amount it
recovered forthwith from the pcf:rso’n;~ w’ho.;«h:a’v’e_ al1’ead§r
received to be deposited before co1.,p1V1_§»’L_A_’p’ . 2 3′
34. Such course of initiated
within three months outcome placed
before the ciVii” to be placed
before the. _with:f reference order.
35. forthwith and at any
rate not later the date of receipt of
a copy of Vti€ais:oi”der. 3 A’
Sd/-3
Tudge