IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CHRCUH7BENCH}fi7DHAR"HU)
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST 20:35 3 ;, u
PRESENT;
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MAEEU
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I<_;.N,KEsHAv:ANARAiTANA
w.A.No. 1 1S2I'*.2:j§t)? (LA) "
BETWEEN:
SAMBASHIVA RAG . V
s;o VENKATASUBBAIAH," .
AGED ABOUT §4*TEARs,»_ T _
1.
OCC: Ac}RIcI1JLTu32E;'«,% . _
R/O TALUKA4 SiiI_RA_G£JP!?A=._ " _
msTR1cT:' B_EL.LAR.Y. '~ _ "
sM?.NAGARATHNAM_Mz1'
W'/O CEIALAVAIAIT' * '-
. AGEE-EABOAIT 54 YEARS, occ: AGRICULTURE,
'mo 'MA1;LAE"AvAN1 CAMP, TAL; SHIRAGUPPA
V_msi*Iz1<.::f; 'BELI;A_RY.
I-:§CT'}é..AI$PE'LLAr¥*i*S ARE
' REPRESENTE4D'BY GPA HOLDER INLMARUTHI.
. . . APPELLANTS
"D {§§'T.:SRIY§JT}i'S SRKULKARNI 623 RAMACHANDRA MALI, ADVS.)
'
/_
'z. /' . - ._
_
AND:
.........j..........
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,
M.S.BUILlI)ING,
BANGALORE-0 I .
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,'
BELLARY DISTRICT, "
BELLARY.
THE ASSISTANT coMM1SS1.oN.?éR,_ 1
BELLARY SUB»DIVISEON, * '
BELLARY. '-
--";~;..f<'E$f5ONDENTS
(BY SRI.C.S.PATIL,;'('}§i"§;§?'
TI-HS §'EIgED-»--iil:S "4"--QFETHE KARNATAKA H!GH
COURT ACT PRA3:'!§si(3; TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN
'}'HE WRIT 1==.STmeN' 2093 Dated 29.5.2007.
THIS w.A.e'__ CQNt1N£i+.'.0!§""_.z?CR PRELIMINARY PRELIMINARY
HEARING-_TvHIS my, MANJUILA CHELLUR, J., DELIVERED THE
FQLLOWIESG: ' ~ ..
JUDGMENT
counsei for the appellants and the learned
ficvemment Sri.C.S.Pati1, for the respondents.
‘~:_”‘ not in eiispute that earlier land in quesfion was the
/
matter of two batches of Writ Petitions wherein, the final
‘V V Anbiéfleafion came to be quashed in the year 1996 and the Land
Acquisition Oficer was required to consider the zepor’£ on the basis
3. However, the direction of the learned Single Judge is only
to give an opportunity to the appellants to put forward,i_ia1ii~these
contentions before the concerned authorities by Wayfmof –o_bje¢ti:_)hs
and then the concerned authorities should proceed» 9
in accordance with law. Therefore, We are finch: .’expressingga::1y
opinion Whether the State underthe coioiirable of;
with malafide intention is the of the
appellants as contended by
4. After the appellants’ direction of the
learned Single iheflcaused to any of the
parties consideration the
objections be the concerned authoritiy
would take ‘proceed with the acquisition or to
drop theppgsaid. In that View of the matter, We do not
toimiiitezefere with the orders of the learned
5. we dispose of the appeal directing the
ee[e;ep;eueeeepeeee:e to file their objection before the Land Acqlzisition
._Gfii:’cei; one month from the date of receipt of copy fo the
order. Thereafter the concerned acquiring authority shall pzoc_e;*;ti– «’
with the matter and dispose of the same within next three
RS/*