High Court Karnataka High Court

V Krishnan S/O Sri Vellakannan vs State Of Karnataka on 18 January, 2010

Karnataka High Court
V Krishnan S/O Sri Vellakannan vs State Of Karnataka on 18 January, 2010
Author: Manjula Chellur Gowda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 18?" DAY OF JANUARY,.&.2_$ViV'§'R,:, :..,,,
PRESENT ':  
THE HO§\|'BLE MRS.IuSTICE'M'A'N3OL'A   V'
AND  '    _ .. ..  
THE HON'BLE MR. }USTI¢E:,,:','>A~~...!\,J.VENEJC5O,PA._,iE}5I~--,VG'O'VV:DA

WRIT APPEAL NOS.39.2-9 =:3_94Vi;/.2009 '(i.v.--A.-IR'ES)

BETWEEN:

1  SR1, \'II~.f;I:,R1S':&~:NA.N"S/O SR1 VELLAKANNAN,
1.AG'E£J ABOUT, 55 Y'EAR--S, '
K7 8 SHI\IAVP'P,I*§'I:OIxI,RO.1I--N O,
B P._ROAO,"T1PTL;--R.':g.

2  " SR1 (3V.S»..,\('O(:ANVANOA, S/O LATE G. S SHIVASHANKAR,
"  ,A_<3E__O ABOUT...4.G'YEARS, §
"3118, III MAIN, K R EXTENSION,

A    

»;.éJ_. " «

 .4_  SMT. PA\/AN BAT, W/O SR1. JUGRA3

SRI'.",@.S. UMAPATHY, S/O LATE GSSIOOALINGAPPA
A.eEO..--ABOuT 76 YEARS,

"(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)
'fiI1IMAIN,T<TENSION,T1PTuR.

AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
RAJENORA METALS,
BM ROAO, TIPTLJRX

 



SR1 G. PARASMAL, S/O SRI. GOMRAJ,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
MANISH ELECTRICALS,

BH ROAD, TIRTU R.

SR1 GTEJRA3, S/O SRI GOMRAJ, 
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, ' 

(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT__CE.A.IMED)_~._, . «. " ''

NAKODA METALS,
BH RAOD, TIPTUR.

SRI T,v. RAMACHANDRA,-G--U.RT.A,'~~.._

S/O LATE K.N. \/'EN'i<AT!'«CH.A%§A._SY|j1ETTY,
AGED ABOUT 52 '{"E'ARS,*  i   _
792, GAJANANA PROVISION :ST.O.RE,.ij~ __ 
BH ROAD,=TIRTUR""I"OW1\J, " ' ., 

S RI ASA rs;I:_I'A.YY. CH.AN:DR;A :.§A:YTH"=SR I N D E,
S/O C'sIA':\: DR_AI<A_NTI_-I' MARUTHE SHINDE,

jAGEDY.A,58,OUfi6o_'Y'EARS, .
*._ORE.~ MA'RLIT.,H'i TA'I.§<'IvE.S' DH ROAD,

TIRTUR. . V  

SRIA'S.AD'ASH.§VAA-,  S/O LATE BABU RAO,

" AGED A-BOUT 53'YEARS,

 585,, BH 

 ,1 D' =

'T'IRT"UR.

 "cAHA,'BjU BAI, S/O LATE BABU RAO,

AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS,
m.O.S--:?,' Bl-1 ROAD,

 TIRTU R.

A Y. ,1__1

12

"SR1. AAIOMRRAKASH,

S/O, LATE A,S.NAGAPRA,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
5:0/483, BH ROAD, TIRTUR.

SR1 K.C,N. PRASAD,

S/O LATE K.£\i,CHANDRASHEKARA SETTY,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,

NO627, DODDARET, TIPTUR.

 



:3

(BY SRI. G. R. RRAKASH, AD\/,)

AND:

1

SR1 TS. RAGHAVENDRA,
S/O SR1. $<.S. SRINIVASA GUPTA,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,

BASA HARDWARE,

BH ROAD, TIPTUR.

ST/-\TE OE $<ARI\§AT/-\§<A, _
REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, __
VEDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE---.A 

THE SECRETARY,

RE.VEN»*..J'TE' ©?EPARTIMENT'.  

;vII<AS.AifSOu'If:HA_, 
',_BAI\_Ic5AVLOR--E_._»  

TI-IE EREGIOVNAIT,'CO'M..M'I'S.SIONER,
BANGALORE-_REC5ION,

=11 ELOOR_EsMTC BUS COMPLEX,

 I<"H ROAD,"S.i:Ig_A_,R,!v"THENAGAR,

BANGALORE» 560 027.

 --  ~D"EI§I'J_j.TY COMMISSIONER,
A "rIuMv.IEi',,T_l;.-T§N:T'I S



8 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER & NATIONAL  
HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION 
(NH SPECIAL DIVISION),    M 
NIRMAN E5HA\/AN,I BLOCK, RI-\JAJ,I,NAjGA.R,"   '
8ANGALORE~S6O O10.   "  '

9 THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE "ENG1NEER,"~ 
NATIONAL HIGHWAY DIvI1SIO,N,»._, 
TUMKUR DISTR1,CT.,_  *  ' 
TDMRDR. ~,;_ ; 3W"

10 THE SECRjE'T.ARY,:'  .4  ' 
MINISTRY OF'SDPEACE"TRANS'ROR~~
    »
GOVERN-MENT"OE 4Ii'Y.'.'VD.1A,'-- 
NEW 'DEI';'HI.-,,IIo .002," "

11 E-.RI' B. 'C..  
MEMBER OF L'E,C5IS'L~A_TIvE ASSEMBLY,
TlPTU_R.= V  ' 

 RESPONDENTS

» ;('E%_\V/VS.RI'.«.T.«F%O."SR1|\i1\/AS, AGA FOR R1 TO R9 I

A "TH2EI;%_E'~.,.V\.?"RIT APPEALS ARE FILED W5 4 OF' THE
RA-RNAT-AY<Ai'.w*HI<3H COURT ACT PRAYENG TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER":.PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION NOS.28962~

  'E25935/V2009 DATED 29/10/2009.

THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY

VMOHEARING THIS DAY, MANJULA CHELLUR J" DELIVERED

THE FOLLOWING:

 



JUDGMENT

Heard the learned counsel for the appe.l:lanVtrs:VV:aréd

learned Government Advocate”»—appeariVngff’foe],tilted’

respondents.

2. The appellants are*- before

us the vacation of .-3″ii..V_inteir’irn’soi’der,_which”‘was in their
favour immediately on ‘fi’iirigV–./of’V the”i2vrit’_’_.petitions in the

light of pro:gresVsl’_’–of by the concerned

authoritiesl’pe;taVii§.iVng.4t’o~..tiie_widening of the roads and also
the factuthaét becaufse”o-fithe interim order, the buildings of

the..petitio’i:ers~».vwe.r-eAwnot touched by the concerned

* Aauithoi=.i’ties…A En Athewiight of the permission opposed by the

‘Vp_ub’iic:::’in_gigeiieirai at Tiptur because of the traffic jam, the

iea_rne_d~ .f~3:i”n..gAlVe Judge was right in vacating the stay order.

Howéveir, consideration was given to the appeilants

‘d.i,recting the authorities to enabie the petitioners /

Vappellants to remove their belongings etc. in

contempiation of 317(3) of the Land Acquisition Act.

According to the learned counsel for the appeliants, said

procedure was not compiied with by the

According to us, the same may be

Eeamed Singie Judge where the matter j::<3uEd'_be"c£.,i3,i§6VsAeTci'

of on merits iaciuding certain reEief_s"–if theflaieiiitéohiersi

appellants are entitied to.

Appeais are dism”i’ssed’.* } ‘4

sac? “. «'”