IN THE HIGH comm OF KARNATAKA AT maagoag A
DATED was we 15* MYMOF way" j
BEFORE *
THE HONBLE M:2.JusTIcEkN&joa%:.AM SHAmAsi;s;soQ9Aakk %
WRIT P§TIT_[ON (1l«__,': 'V«"*-i<'iAE_)__B_.)
Between:
Roy Rodrigues i ~
Rep by his Power (ff _ ~ A
Attorney HoEc1cr_.7*_ ' .
Ramesh 52;, _, V
S/o Viflal Shettjr
Aged ab-Qut__33 "
R/a 2694, 13%' _
4*" Cross, HAL II Sfagfi' _ _
indixanagar, " * ~~ . fctitioncr
- ._(By & Associates, Adv.,)
1." The Gtivérsrzzfiziaent of Kanlataka
Rap by itsjfiecrctaxy
Depgartgnent 01' Commerce as
Indufitrcics, Viihana Soudha
A' Ba;1gak)rc~56G O01.
taka kndusm.-a1" Area
F Development Boaznd
" Rep by its Secretary
No.14/3, H Floor
RP. Buzikiing
Nrupathuaga Road
Bangabxt-560 (30 1.
3. EMS. Cauvery Motors Pvt. Ltd.,
S.No. 13, Ilth KM
Kanakapura Road
BaI1ga1ore--560 062
Rep by its Director.
4. M13. Advaith Motors
No. 12, Ivfmsiorl Road
Shaina Ran Compound
Banga1ore--56(} 027 _ *
Rep by its Director. _ '.'.-Re:-spondents
(By Sri M. Kcshava Raddy. 'AGA.; %.f;$a:::«__
Sri S.R. "g's<iv., for 323'& R4)
This w:itv.§~*::ti1:'g::;1:;s'iiged under Articles 226 & 22?' of the
Constitutioxz of .1nmja,pmyi:;g'~--to quash the gazette notification
par£:--EII of'No.*2059_datcd"25¥~11'-2005 at Am1exuxve--J acqujxing
the petitio11érfs"1and _in;Sy,'P .0.225 mcasmfing 2 amass '2 guntas
left out after écquitixzg 31 of land in the 381116 survey
nurabcgr *situate'(i.._V at V Banandur Village, Bidadi Hobii,
" f?_am'a1."iaga~I'aJ11A.'I'a1uk',"' 'Bangalore District.
" V Ftgtition having been heard and msezvcd for
oicleiséoii 2'1 and pronounced the ordars an 1" July
'.E.'0{)"3_:V M
ORDER
Fefifioner being the land cawncr qua-stions the
amillisition notification dated 25.11.2605 (i.e., Final
Nb
-3″
Notification) produced at Annexure–‘J’ to the
by which the petitioner’s iand bearing ‘
measuring 2 acres 2 guntas
acquiring ’21 guntas of land the«’seia,e s1;,z’i?e;${“1iu1i:1E§er “~sV
situated at Banandur village,
Taluk, Bangalore Dismetfls eesoondents~
authorities. He also ailotment of
sites made 4 carved out of
the ii V
2. M’1M*n%e ;;f:;§¢a1 that the preliminary
notification 28 (1) of the kiaznataka
J V’ Areas L)ev’eiopment Act (hereinafter referred to
“as for short) was issued on 15.4.3997,
proposing ‘2 acres 23 guntas of ianci in Smvey
“«.__Vko.225″ voelonging to the petitixmer along with various
A orofjxer Totally about 1884 acres of land was sought
’11’ tofbe acquired under the said notifioafion. The Final
” Notificafion came to be issued on 4.4. 3998 in respect of 21
-4-
guntas of iand in Survey 1510.225 and aiong V.
other properties and the same were handed K
respondent–.Karnataka industrial:
Board for development. ‘i’hereafter;*~.t;ie co11;.’;je%1:iseitionA.”is’V d’
paid to the petitioner which respect
of 2 1 guntas. Thus, at _no*dficsflon was
not issued in respect of of land
in sy.no.225.. in respect
of 2 acres 25.11.2005 aiongwith
certain other thetnotification produced at
Annexure-tufts In the meanwhile, the
_. V final notifieatiofis ceftain dates are issued in respect of
were sought to be acquired in the
On 20th of March 2006,
~pessessioi*t “is taken by respondent No.2-Karnataka
V’ Areas Development Board {hereinafter referred
;the Board’ for short) of the remaining portion of 2
‘2 guntas of land in Survey No.225. The Board in
turn afletted the preperty in question in two bits to
.. 5 ..
respondents 3 and 4 in the zfionth of March 2008. This
writ petifion is filed praying for quashing the—-.__f’1nai
notification.
3. Learned counsel appearing on
argued that the petitioner is not-‘issuecl Iiotiee V
before issuing the final nofiiieafiof:;__
notification cannot be iss11ed”‘-.al’i;.=:r lspse’ of E75
the date of issuing :i0tjficaiiorl;””V4ti1at the
preflmi;1efi’j% “set§fi£§%;.fiafi~j§;iate{i””‘i’S.4.1997 is deemed to
have been’ «of passage of time; that no
1’1otie.g.is iss{ieri:’to..€:he”pefitioner while taking possession of
‘om? .m1dler secson 28 (6) of the Km) Act; and
of the land in the State has taken place in
the (i.e., the year of issuing final notification)
hezzoe, the principles of Section 1 LA of the Land
.iA:;£;t1isition Act should be made applicable to the facts of
this case also. Lastly, it is contended that the
\/ow
.. 5 –
compensation is to be paid to the petitioner based on the
market value as on today.
4. The Writ mtition is opposed by ~
appearing on behalf of respondents. mayo ” ” ”
statement of objections. The
argued in support of the of ‘by
contending that the notice waVs…iVssu1e€iL_ to ‘1ih–e..,spe;i§:itior1er
before passing the final ‘as at the time
of taking jjrogierty. They further
submitt§d’vv–,;fiat for issuing two or three
firml notifi_catio1as”‘oasuedA’–oI§ ‘single preliminary notification,
viwhen sought to be acquired is a Vast;
area to be formed is comprising
‘–w~’»,ef va1*iousv.lasmis of various dimensions belonging to
‘ < jv 'various people.
“E5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of
” “respondent No.2~Board has made available the records
\/9?
-7-
znaintajned by the Land Acquisition Officer and the
Ibr perusal of the Court. The contention of ~
that no notice was issued to him before n V’
notification cannot be sustained, inas}ntuchttas;’ the
was issued to the petitioner ” ‘
notification in respect of. the extent of 23
guntas of land. and ‘K3′
produced by “aiong with their
statement the notices are issued
to the elem’ that the entire extent of 2
acres 23 xis to be acquired aiongwith
_” at the out set, the Board has
clear that the entire 2 acres 23 guntas
of’. However, the objections am not
‘ filed f)etitioner. Therefore, it shall have to be held
%:;;a’: the petitioner did not object for acquisition of his land
on extent ofiz acres 23 guntas.
6. It is no doubt true that the Final Notification in
respect of 21 guntas only (along with other lands) was
\/V
– 9 –
totaliy measuring 219 acres 11 guntas, including the
property of the petitioner.
Under similar circumstances, this Court in .,
of B.x. AND armies -93- 3;.e;2§L, ”
smegma; AND mvowmx (Am 1)’,
has ruled that successive notiI’ieatione__ zii_difi’eI4e_:1t ”
Wili not cause any prejudice to owners. :.’.=Sii;;oeVVVthe
scheme of the KIADB foffiaefion of
industrial layout is e. compreheifisi.ve” the
acquisitiofixof aree ‘i::’:fve’1″»;=gi’ scheme can take place
at different to time depending on the
gievelopxzieijtal ac1Eiv’itVie_e__A2?J1d its compietion. in the very
jusigjent, jxeid that the land owners will be
in accoxfiance with the Land
V fl.Acquisi’e:’e:1 AC1; xinasmuch as, they are not only entitled to
mic, but ease the solatium, additionai market
~~o’_s._2f’;aii1e’,’.; interest on solatium, interest of market value etc.,
._’li””l’.iee.’e factors will compensate the damage, if any,
sustained by the land owner. Moreover, time taken by the
K45?
-13-
authorities to acquire the land and in taking
would enure to the owner’s benefit of
usufructus of the land til} he is ” ‘
award is passed. Thus, successixie “i’1otiI’i§’z:*.t:ie;1sL_L:”‘«st*Jf.
different stages will not cause preju_dioe: to ” ‘
owners like petitioner as in ttievgebosvsession
till passing of the award oiVta_ K3’ “P s.§¥”seti1sEiV”;fiossession. This
Court in yet snomer the case of
Smtsakammiz in Writ
Petition h%e;3i*«§.81–32«5§82/1″996 and connected
matters, has ” f.11zz_:t ‘_”_.»svs4uccessive fnal notificafjons
_.based .. single notification can be issued.
Wrxiie’-»con§:i11difiE..’so, this Court in the aforementioned
V iudgniem thus:
V ” .. the aforesaid provisrlons it is cieair
V * Vtfiere shalt be an industriat area and the
Board shall function for promotion and
assistance so the rapid and orderly
establishment, growth and deveiopment of
irtdustries in the izzdusttial areas. It is also
\\/W
-13..
relevant to note that Section 27 of the
provides that Chapter wt of the Act shall I AL
only tosuch are-asfmm such dareets V
notified by the State Gover1i:feer;-t A AA
seczfion (3) of Section 1 Qf_T
scheme of the Act, it
situated within the fl<)r~..ar¢£-is:
declared to be an azone be acquired: _ The .. industrmlg g " ,, and
managehze”rzt:V’1«:;gf is a Eong
c€r£;:,¢,vr; No time limit
also material to see
that xeizere of lands are proposed
a.aqussi:ianez;2u1er the nottficattian issued
e ~. (1; ofsection 28 ofthe Act, it
possible for the czuthorities to
” acquisition at a s’mgle stroke in
Sub-see.(2) and sub~«sec.(3) of the Act
” mandates the notice to the owneror the
and to at! such persons known or
believed to be mterested therein and to provide
them an opportunity of being heard in respect
oftheirobjeetionswtdtamakeordersin
\/”‘
-13..
Under such circumstances, the Land Acqtiisitiefl’
may choose to hear the persons who it_£”1ei’1*: _
statement of objections at the
notification in iespect of those “the f.V”:2’*?.:-1;.’ e’
«fhereafter, he may choose in
respect of other could
be served and heard to hear large
number of objections, the
State period of time and it
may furders in individual cases.
‘§’herefore,& ewoizlhd’ necessary for the State
_.. V.G0ver;.§§i:iieI1t to déifiemnt orders followed by difierent
subsequent declarations would 1101: in
angsway eaii’se Vjpfejudice to the owners, the same cannot
% [be mid e:o:.pe impermissible.
For the very reason, it cannot be said that the
notification dated 15.4.1997 based on which
the finai notification was not passed for about 7 to 8
-14-
years cannot be heid to have been Lapsed-«
aforementioned, the Board was in continuo1;s”_’p;fo:e§ess of ”
formation of indusniai iayout, it
acquired more than about _r1_884 ‘V
formation of Bidadi industrial seneme is
a comprehensive and came
to be executed completely
by issuing the work
..
9. The that the notice was issued
under SeotioVn””i?.%8′{f>)VVof Act to the petitioner. The
‘eepy vnotiee’is——moduced by the petitioner himself
ate1’__An:riex?g1::e-5K?o::ajong with the Writ petition. *1’hus, it
cannotbe Veeidflflat no notice was issued to the petifioner
:jv*}._’H’£.d€I’ Seetion 28(6) ef the Kim.) Act. Annexure–“K«6′
is the document which shows that the
uovemment has taken possession of the property
has handed over the same to the Board. Thereafter,
Vw
H15-
Merety because the final notification is
and possession is taken thereafter, the
take the benefit of the same.
finai nofification is issued Later, _ ipetitiexjer *
beneficiary, inasmuch as, he in’-;v;>sS;esSion of
the property and mad:eV’ “nielifiiiettie of the
property all the date of
I 1. ‘ ‘ef he of the Land
Acquisition»Aett5ve2ii”i;;3.et*»!ieaii1ede..e.;ipfieable to the facts of
this case”, is not passed belatedly
in this Section 1 LA of the
Aetezemd be appiimble only if the award
years from the date of line! notification.
‘1’heI’efere,_A principle cannot be applied to the
~ .. ._ facts of mse.
it . “12. one of the most important faster in the matter
K that the petitioner has made representatien as per
,4:.”AI1nexuIe–‘H’ to the Writ petition on 23.12.1999 praying
Q/A
-13,
year 1999 to the entire extent of 2 acres
inciudirlg the petition property, he cannot to t
file the writ petition questioning:-..
notifications, that too, after lapse 0Vf*.£;i’f)01It :
from the date of finai netificafion: the
said representation vide 23.12.1999
clearly reveels of things.
Therefore, he petition at the
eariiest. .’. is liable to be
dismissect2Q11._ and lashes also, apart
firm the fact””t1_3atVt.tie not mailatainable in View of
his reprémerptation ” vidVe___A.m1exure-‘H’. Looking from any
does not find any mound to quash the
notification.
Aoczoiiiafnhygétlvv, m” petm’ ‘on faiks and the same is
Wi
Iudg
*blc/hen