{"id":216542,"date":"2010-10-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-10-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010"},"modified":"2014-06-24T17:11:18","modified_gmt":"2014-06-24T11:41:18","slug":"sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010","title":{"rendered":"Sri B R Pathi vs The Special Land Acquisition … on 6 October, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Sri B R Pathi vs The Special Land Acquisition … on 6 October, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: D.V.Shylendra Kumar<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BA%\u00a7f;C\"Ah'REW\n\nDATED THES THE 6\"' DAY OF OCTOBER, 2010\n\nBEFORE\n\nTHE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.v.sHYLENI)I2A KUMAH f\ufb01j A  '\n\nW.P.No. 9819\/2008 {LA--F:<ES}jE..:' \nBETWEEN: V'  \n\nSR1. B.R.PA'I'HI,  \ns\/o LATE SMT. R.RAMARATHNAM1wA' *   \n\n& SR1. B.S.RAJAGOPALA  2 \n\nAGED ABOUT 39 YEARS.  \n\nR\/AT No.4, 7TH CROSS...  E\n\nKATRIGUPPE,    I    \nBANGALORE--560_QL_5._. _   :v--v..'..I5}13\u00a7T'I'l'IONI+3R\n\n{BY SR1. ARAVIND. ADif.;;I\u00abfo'I?'  I.  V\nSR1. P.M.NAr~I.I.AV'I1EDI;w;\u00a5 at-s_RI. S.C;BHUTI, ADVS.]\n\nAND:  '- '\n\n1. THE SPECIAL LANDAGTQUISITION\nOFFICER,' NA'l'IONAL HIGH WAYS\nFOR HIGH WAY. N__Q.7,\n\n- A  -- HOSUR ROAD,\n* \n' .;BAHGA.LoRE_1.. 560 002.\n\n2.'  \ns \/Q "B, K. LAKSHMAIAH,\nAGEQWMAJOR.\n\n-  B.L.BABU.\nV s\/0 13.K.LAKsHMAIAH,\n AGED MAJOR.\n\n\n\n4. SRI. B.L.SOI\\\/IASHEKAR,\nS\/O B.K.LAKSHMAIAH,\nAGE-D MAJOR.\n\n5. SR}. E.L.RAJSHEKAR,\nS\/O B.K.I..AKSI-IMAIAH,\nAGED MAJOR. \n\n6. SR}. B.L.SANTI-IANA KRISHNA, \nS\/O B.K.LAKSI-IMAIAH, *\nAGED MAJOR.\n\nRESPONDENTS 2 TO 6 ARE ALL \nR\/AT BOMMANAHALLI VILLAGE; "-\u00bb\nBEGUR I-IOBLI,      "\nI-IOSUR MAIN ROAD, "    _ \nBANGALORE SOUTH_T_A'LUKI_  "\n\n7. BANGALORE CIHY CO-OPERATIVE' BANK,\nBANGALOR; 560 0.18.3 I  * I\nREP, ..BY_I'1"S_ MP;N4AG.ER_ '    RESPONDENTS\n\n(BY SR1, N;B.'.IISEWAI~IA*rI1;" AGA FOR R1\n\nSRI.'\u00abSUDEEP,'A:)v'.'--~FOR~"\nM\/S SING-HA1*E_LA'&"PARTNERS, ADVS. FOR R1\nSR1. B.C';S_EETI-IARAMA RAO, ADV. FOR R7\n\n, 'R2 "F0 5 SERVED,\n\n- .I._N'Oi'I'ICE fro R6 I-IELD SUFFICIENT}\n\n .  PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226\n\nOF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASI-I\n DATED 4.1.2007 {ANNEXURE -- B) AND THE\n\n'H.\u00ab,_I*.,ORDER_DATED 27.5.2008 (ANNEXURE MD) ISSUED BY THE\nV " xRAI.=__AS  SAME IS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND IN\n  OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE.\n\nTHIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR FURTHER\n\nI I}: " "ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING;\n\n\n\nORDER\n<\/pre>\n
Issue ruie.\n<\/p>\n
2. This matter has come up for    <\/p>\n
3. The order passed by  \u00bb(1:0Lir’:._T
\nreads as under : it 1 l l A
\n“This writ petition} listed’-Jfor ‘talting
\nsteps in respect   ufnserved” 6’5″
\nrespondent. ‘I t l ‘  = . 7’n\\O  .  that 6″”
\nresponClen’t.___   -fjfesidiznlce at<\/p>\n
Bomrn  lie;    Beau Hobli,<\/p>\n
 is the same
\n  2 to 5, who are
\nall VlllbroihersVA’.oj’\u00ab.:.u~”d6i”* respondent, being
\n.. lclhiidrenll  hmaiah, are residing.<\/p>\n
  Resporidents 2 to 5 are served but are not<\/p>\n
 repfrepselnvt\u00e9d.\n<\/p>\n
 In the circumstances, learned<\/p>\n
V ”  _counsel for the petitioner has \ufb01led a memo<\/p>\n
   for holding service on 63* respondent as<\/p>\n
sufficient as the notice issued to 6m
\nrespondent has been returned with postal<\/p>\n
shara “no such person” and “address<\/p>\n
insufficient” on two different occassions<\/p>\n
when notice was sought to be served on”*—_
\nhim, where as his brothers respondents?’jbbtjd-.<\/p>\n
to 5 have been served at  <\/p>\n
address and acknowledgeITLerits”1::’_’;v  <\/p>\n
having received notices:  if them,’  :;_t<\/p>\n
available in Court records.\n<\/p>\n
In the circurrzs.ta:fnces_,g’ se’rv1.’cef of<\/p>\n
notice on 6th respic\u00e9ndegntjis ‘4f’i\u00a3fld’S.L1_\ufb02’iCi\u20acnf.<\/p>\n
 iS;’su:,ed.= perusal of the<\/p>\n
 passed by
\n    V  Acquisition
\n rnore illegality and<\/p>\n
evena . possibie’fraudulent order being<\/p>\n
_\u00a7C’passed”‘  the first respondent to the
\n  of the petitioner and for
\nit -VVierii’ichiiig.?respondents 2 to 6, particularly<\/p>\n
”  6″? respondent.\n<\/p>\n
Even while there was a dispute and<\/p>\n
 tithe matter was required to be referred to<\/p>\n
the Civil Court for resolution of the dispute,
\nthe Land Acquisition Officer has ventured<\/p>\n
to determine the entire entitlement on his<\/p>\n
5<\/span><\/p>\n
own and to the exclusion of the petitioner
\nheld that respondents 2 to 6 are entitled to-.___
\nreceive the entire compensation arriou_’rIet.:’f\u00ab..t_:”‘\u00abV
\nwhich is not a small sum. Therefore{\u00a7rfirs’tp:*i:{T
\nrespondent is directed to be pres_ent–ljefore
\nthe Court along with   :_
\n10-2010, as requested
\nGovernment  _’    <\/p>\n
Furnish  copy”  larder. go
\nteamed   –.\n<\/p>\n
4. Writ.-petition for quashing<\/p>\n
Amerugg   dead dated 4.1.2007) and<\/p>\n
Annexi1re”–D order dated 27.5.2008) and<\/p>\n
for fnrtherl\u00e9anaendment “to direct the 15′ respondent — the<\/p>\n
 Acqiiisition Officer, National High Ways for<\/p>\n
  Bangalore , to refer the dispute between<\/p>\n
the-pet.itiori’er — the owner and respondents 2 to 7.<\/p>\n
 A.  5;’ “On the other hand, the Civil Court has resolved<\/p>\n
 “question as to the entitlement and apportionment of<\/p>\n
 “”eompensation payable in respect of the 5 guntas of<\/p>\n
6<\/span><\/p>\n
land, which has a superstructured measuring about
\n506 Sq. nits. in Sy. No.3 of Bomrnanahalii ViI1age,’e’f3’egur
\nHobli, Bangalore South Taluk, in respect
\nfirst respondent had determined the–\u00ab
\npayable to the land owner:\n<\/p>\n
Rs.79,59,961\/–.   :\n<\/p>\n
6. In terms of An’r1e”xure–  “v.\u00a3fV.Vai”fZ’L “dated<\/p>\n
04.01.2007 passed  th’ed””Sp.:\u00e94cia1-._LandV”AcVquisition
\nOfficer and Authorised  effect to in
\nterms of fu1’ti’:\u00abepr* order  (copy at
\nAr1ne2:\u00a71_A1re~’I)V7VVt’c.’i;hefpetiti’o.n’) passed by the Special Land<\/p>\n
Acquisition’ hf’-;1.I4t1’1OI’iS(3C1 Officer copy of which<\/p>\n
 is pfiodiiced at”Annexure~D to the petition, wherein, the<\/p>\n
 ‘petitioners’4arrayed as parties claimants in the foliowing<\/p>\n
order    against the present respondents 2 to 6<\/p>\n
 (Mr; .]3V”l\u00ab:_,..SVridhar, Mr.B.L.Babu, Mr. B.L.Somashekar,<\/p>\n
A If\/fr0.’B;.L.Rajshekar, Mr.B.L.Santhana Krishna) to this<\/p>\n
0.   petition as rivais to the proceedings in the following<\/p>\n
order.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
7. Under this order, the Special Land Acquisition
\nOfficer, purporting to resoive the competing Veiaims
\nbetween the petitioner and the responptiente:ffor
\nentitiement and apportionment of the
\namount in respect of 5 gunta;3″‘of’i.an\u00a7:1,  of
\nwhich the compensation is  fa
\nRs.”\/9,59,961\/– in terms of tii.e:”awart1 <\/p>\n
.  ea\u00a23\u00e9.\u00a7”yve–:’j4  _ ‘<\/p>\n
a~uj,.@_,mabc; 30333 ~   ttnogrseaigx nmaa
\na”rici)a?\/0053′) a5rt$riVpC3.\u00a7a’Jarfi(j.\u00a7;;’5..V s9:\u00a7Ae;2o;%f5;ajg;’~V–\u00e9g\u00a7r:3a03)r% z\u00e9origirado
\n_c:5z\u00a7,_m  ~251\u00b0’rfi0cii)_  f7E)\ufb01Ii)C5 X1560.
\nsoc; oaogqfe  506 23.m\u00b0. (0-05<\/p>\n
mow)  imaged 2,332.25 9%\u00bb geaoeasc
\na5,saasas0.;2s;9z3it’;i;>a5::,m 0i2\u00a2aJae-aevs’ea)\u00a7_m0veaa:oa).<\/p>\n
V nar.:i><:5.\u00ab_%.;de:3\u00a3"~ m}f,m\u00e9'_=..  \u00e9agg\u00e9i 9055530 aboawafiri 5-d\u00e9aoci 5503<\/p>\n
:scx.j' ' V' "\u00a32300 '- n. was ~.\n<\/p>\n
adaasao aria?) caaroaciaidi 531933
\ns\ufb01axidiaijaia<\/p>\n
 =   zuoczi\u00e9d<\/p>\n
1     7959951-00 a3.cJe>=i\u00ae_,,e:;3of, 5309951 seamen?
\nmg.\u00bb  * ‘gs.-\u00ab:m;;;'(o– a.me:v*.a3aw, eaamjajcjos<\/p>\n
A V. .05;-kboa\u00e9) a0.oJe1v”g’irara’i>a’e9.>0\u00b0”, same
\n 5510.34 z3.oJc:=f.0a2:a5mo\u20ac 5035 mass
\n‘adv. aka. 23.930″ :5030a5z3\u00a7c1 23900\/idatigi.<\/p>\n
9-9<\/p>\n
95 0
\n(ifc?.R503 +
\naarba
\n\u00e9egpa\u00e9<\/p>\n
aiori\u00e9aada ms ans\u00bb 1650000. e3.oar3\u00e9’ri5″a\u20ac@\u00b0’o
\neaadcie\u00e9sw’ 21305036′,  ace’<\/p>\n
530:; aimazfa) axe,  aormcig ma
\n2J95?33U9?:#  0<\/p>\n
a  –}w>e’)V
\n.  &m_tj)&jaOC3\u00ab_ _.\n<\/p>\n
 ado;-_5.~’ mg
\n306 10.50 5%,
\nd\/arie\u00e9aigi
\nwmcf\ufb02a\u00e9rg\ufb01o
\nas agar\u00e9\u00e9
\n _ ‘   macaw ‘ ‘<\/p>\n
3 $<\/p>\n
30330132: 0093
\na\ufb01owaci 4,
\n.:~39w\u00e9Xu5\u00e9,1z:i>.\n<\/p>\n
aa;e\u00a25m5;:   \u00a7\u00e9.\ufb01c:5 a\ufb01oaaaoaiig
\ncma\ufb01\u00e9zien t:;\u00a7dra%\u00bb_%ii\u00a7;=\u00a7,,   _ u   ”<\/p>\n
  to Engiishz Compensation<\/p>\n
 in reepetii” of 506 Sq. mts. (5 guntas) to<\/p>\n
  ~1′?:3v;’_i,.Ba\u00a5:>u, B.L.Somasheka__r,_ B.L.Rajshekar,<\/p>\n
 Krishna are entitled for a sum of<\/p>\n
\/- in total. Bangalore City Co–operative<\/p>\n
A   Chaznarajpet, Barzgaiere, is entitled for sum of<\/p>\n
t   …R\u00a7,.18,50,000\/~ be-mg amount that the bank can claim<\/p>\n
V due to the loan raised by one Mr. B.L.Ganesh -on the<\/p>\n
security of the property and therefore, the said amount
\nrepresenting his share in the compensation amount in
\nrespect of 5 guntas of land acquired is to <\/p>\n
to the Bank.\n<\/p>\n
9. The above order
\npetitioner amongst clairnan-ts’   .
\napplicants \/claimants  in the  l– \/NH-
\n7\/BHRC\/CR\/29\/O6aO’7iV:d’.–d’ate\u00a7:l:}  [copy at
\nAnnexure–D  the   it even Without
\nseeking  resolution by a civil
\ncourt  of sub–section [4] of<\/p>\n
section 3H.__of the I\\aTation:al4Highways Act, 1956 [for short<\/p>\n
, _ ‘the  reading .as___u.nder:\n<\/p>\n
  it  \ufb01e-posit and payment of amount —<\/p>\n
 [4_}”  any dispute arises as to the
\napportionment of the amount or any part
\n.A  thereof or to any person to whom the same
\nV “-.or any part thereof is payable, the
\nV’ competent authority shall refer the dispute
\nto the decision of the principal civil court of
\noriginal jurisdiction within the limits of
\nwhose jurisdiction the land is situated.”<\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
and the writ petitioner being left high and dry by this<\/p>\n
course of action claiming that the petitioner has no<\/p>\n
other remedy to redress the injury, namely,.._.lth.te’<\/p>\n
denial of the compensation to which _<\/p>\n
entitled to in law being son of  <\/p>\n
along with one B R Sampanlgiramaiahi. <\/p>\n
Srinivasagupta [claimants  fl   special
\nland acquisition the  petition for the<\/p>\n
relief as noticed_above,.–   ‘<\/p>\n
10. EIn’e;fgenti1._notiee  issued to the<\/p>\n
resporidents..  are all served.\n<\/p>\n
_-11.  ‘respcriclent — special land acquisition<\/p>\n
‘A if  *”Whoi.was represented initially by the Additional<\/p>\n
 *-.(.lever1irnentf’jAdvocate, is now represented by M\/s.<\/p>\n
 Partners and Mr. Sudeep, Advocate<\/p>\n
 Vp”appears–‘ for the first respondent, who has now come up<\/p>\n
  ‘as”‘s*accessor to the Additional Government Advocate<\/p>\n
 “who was appearing for the special land acquisition<\/p>\n
officer earlier and who it appears is now Advocate for<\/p>\n
11<\/span><\/p>\n
the first respondent for the reason that the National
\nHighway Authorities for whose benefit the
\nwas being acquired, namely, for the
\nconstruction of ‘elevated highwayiand it
\nway on the National Highway
\nBangalore Hosur Highway the VNat.iojnal’-miiighwaylV’V
\nwho were earlier dep’enden.t”‘ori._:’the__State”Government
\nand its special land  purpose of
\nacquisition for    appears having
\nnow  of their own officers
\nand  the officers from the
\nState  (as by the use of the<\/p>\n
revenue ofticiais)..\u00bbthe’- revenue department may be they<\/p>\n
 V.  –Ahad’–bu\u00bb1’nt”‘their  and had a bitter experience.<\/p>\n
i ”   1v.’.?V..’ vvith this background and in this state of<\/p>\n
 ihave heard both Mr. N B Vishwanath, learned<\/p>\n
it ‘v~:i_”Avddi’t_iona1 Government Advocate who had filed power<\/p>\n
  for the first respondent earlier and Mr. Sudeep, learned<\/p>\n
 counsel who appears for first respondent as of now.<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
13. Be that as it may, some of the other<\/p>\n
respondents though served have remained absent.<\/p>\n
While the seventh respondent is representedppbj<\/p>\n
Seetharama Rao, learned Advocate is not   H<\/p>\n
14. It is in this background’, thejrnatter:ilhatlbo\ufb01ie<\/p>\n
up before this court earlier”‘*-and the  as’-it<\/p>\n
indicated in the beginning oVf.th;is._oi’der. .’<\/p>\n
is 15. Mr. pSeenapp:l’a._   special land<\/p>\n
acquisition ?_oft’it;j:ser .\\’%;rho:_ “has  passed the order at<\/p>\n
Annexure’–D.:’:ivf,i_S   the court and has
\nfurnished his  and particulars which is<\/p>\n
alsor\ufb01tceived  kept  the record of the writ petition.<\/p>\n
 ~  1.Seenappa G V has stated that he has been<\/p>\n
t1’ansferre\u00a7i’:’ touthe office of the Deputy Commissioner,<\/p>\n
 Childtaballapur and now it is attached to the Urban<\/p>\n
V’ f”IAA)pe\\dfelopment Cell of Chikkaballapur Town with the<\/p>\n
  designation ‘Project Director’ and has been functioning<\/p>\n
 so for the past about two years; that he had continued<\/p>\n
as a special land acquisition officer till November 2008<\/p>\n
13<\/span><\/p>\n
and thereafter he is working in the office of the Deputy
\nCommissioner, Chikkaballapur. V <\/p>\n
17. With regard to the
\nspecial land acquisition of\ufb01cer_,sta_tes ‘
\nremember the details at this
\nrecords are looked into.l\u00bb-Ielfowever,  i
\nlearned Additional ll,_%\\dV’Q\u00a7atel,’ whdihad \ufb01led
\npower earlier pleads   not-‘._available today
\nand given   before the<\/p>\n
court.\n<\/p>\n
 Thevfspecialylaiid acquisition officer was<\/p>\n
directedbefore the court only for the<\/p>\n
 rea’sor1_\u00b0that the-e___manner of disbursement of a huge<\/p>\n
 ‘ ,i_l_l1″Il’iQE7A.1i’l_tV”‘Clf.’:.RS.79,59,961\/W in favour of only a few<\/p>\n
persons, too who had figured as rivals in the<\/p>\n
 application filed by as many as seven persons amongst<\/p>\n
A “ll  \ufb01gured the petitioner as \ufb01fth applicant and to the<\/p>\n
  exclusion of all private applicants except for the<\/p>\n
Manager, City Co–operative Bank Limited, Bangalore<\/p>\n
\u00a7;\/\/r<\/p>\n
14<\/span><\/p>\n
who has been apportioned a sum of Rs.16,50,000\/– as
\nthe amount belonging to one B L Ganesh who again<\/p>\n
\ufb01gured as second respondent or a second rival in7t_he<\/p>\n
application, only indicates that the entire’_.:\u00a7rnoungt <\/p>\n
been disbursed in favour of  .pers_o’ns”*–figuring as”<\/p>\n
rivals to the determination dated.27;’,’_5:fl7.008  <\/p>\n
in favour of the applicaIilts’~.though_’ inu..of the-if<\/p>\n
statutory provisions noticed.-aboveguthe ‘disbursement of
\nthe amount should have’awaited’:’determination by the<\/p>\n
civil court  it  ofwthe special land<\/p>\n
acquisition” to,:have_ll'”referred the matter for
\nresolution’–  whereas the special land<\/p>\n
acquisition” of\ufb01cer  himself embarked upon such<\/p>\n
 = detennfina’tion andleven disbursement.<\/p>\n
‘  V   . l  course of action is not contemplated in<\/p>\n
 the detriment of the petitioner and others<\/p>\n
 who were applicants before the special land acquisition<\/p>\n
officer in the proceedings dated 27.5.2008, naturally<\/p>\n
 wereates an impression of the special land acquisition<\/p>\n
of\ufb01cer acting in a hasty and preemptive manner to the<\/p>\n
15<\/span><\/p>\n
detriment of the petitioner and possibly due to any<\/p>\n
collusion between the special land acquisition’<\/p>\n
and the bene\ufb01ciaries who have received the~’.arnou.r1tl\u00a7” —  <\/p>\n
20. Mr. Seenappa, the speciiallland~..lacdui’sitie:gn<\/p>\n
of\ufb01cer who is before the.7cQ.urtVlh,as statedjvthVatl3 <\/p>\n
amount has been disbursed bylhthelvspeicial land
\nacquisition officer  the  authorities by
\nmeans of cheques rn’ade::’oyer_’,t’o ..li:h.e:’\u00bb’lrespondents in<\/p>\n
  ._fur’tli’er determination dated<\/p>\n
terms of
\n27-5-29.08’lV{‘Ckj’p3’5Z;::’ ,at–..j’Agr1he:\u00a71:ire-5D] and this is the
\ndeveIoprncnt.’for further details he Wili<\/p>\n
have to referllto the records.\n<\/p>\n
 ye   ‘fh.i_s  exercising the power of judicial<\/p>\n
 o_f,el\\\u00ab’i’_9’V’.’l7 ad_rrii.riistrative action will only look into the<\/p>\n
orders ..passed by the administrative authorities and<\/p>\n
]qi1a_si judicial authorities as to the legality and the\n<\/p>\n
 -_t’c_nability of such orders and will not normally embark
\nit  ‘on either enquiring into the conduct and manner of<\/p>\n
5 functioning of such of\ufb01cials nor is it necessary for other<\/p>\n
16<\/span><\/p>\n
quasi judicial functionary to appear before this court
\nand explain the manner of conducting the proceedings,<\/p>\n
as a quasi judicial function is not
\nadministrative function but is a
\nwith a judicial determination b7Lit”i’_)’yi\u00ab
\nfunctionary. In such a situation;-the
\nfunctionary has to act <\/p>\n
provisions and nothin:g~~\u00bbelse’;ff   1, . <\/p>\n
22.. Yet another:_’pecui,ia.r ‘aspect this case which
\nis obvious,’    V  ‘ is passed by the
\npredecessor   “f name C. Mohammed<\/p>\n
Kaieemuiiaht,  land acquisition officer<\/p>\n
 an_di,further ordenisv passed by the successor special<\/p>\n
   officer, namely, Seenappa G V., Who is<\/p>\n
present’ beforefthe court today.<\/p>\n
 ..   While the award per se cannot be found fault<\/p>\n
_’  witii”as it is a determination of compensation in respect<\/p>\n
  “of lands acquired, in the absence of a further reference<\/p>\n
sought to the civil court for enhancement etc., there is<\/p>\n
17<\/span><\/p>\n
no need to quash this award per se whether the award<\/p>\n
is passed bona fide or otherwise.<\/p>\n
24. While the award if not
\nnecessary to examine the ”\n<\/p>\n
the award is passed by the then’\u00bb,spe’cial
\nofficer as the whole proceedings
\npossible favoritism,    llvictirrlizration of<\/p>\n
persons like the petitioner..\n<\/p>\n
25. Inf’ order dated<\/p>\n
27  land acquisition officer
\nis r1otVll”suustaina_blle’w.liri..;_:laI.rV at all as the entitlement<\/p>\n
between the petitionerlllland other competitors should<\/p>\n
‘l V.  ‘~haVVel:.be”en l’i’esolVedmonly by the civil court and not by the<\/p>\n
A*~special..lfiand’-_-acquisition officer. Therefore, it is<\/p>\n
inevitable  quash the order at Annexure–D by issue of<\/p>\n
it   writ of certiorari.\n<\/p>\n
26. Therefore while writ petition is allowed and<\/p>\n
 rule is made absolute, it is further necessary to ensure<\/p>\n
awareness to the manner in which said proceedings go<\/p>\n
18<\/span><\/p>\n
on and particularly in the matter of land acquisition
\nproceedings and the further manner of identifyiwng\ufb01ihe
\npersons who are entitled for receiving  <\/p>\n
apportionment if there are competing .clairn_s etc…’  in<\/p>\n
27. As this court is  to
\nenquiry nor is it petition on
\nboard only for such General of
\nthis court is directed””‘t’o.-   of this order
\nalong     the Karnataka
\n  to hold an
\ninquiry’  under which the said<\/p>\n
awards  ltol’l3ev.l::_ll.passed by the special land<\/p>\n
 , g_ acqdisiti’on oflic’er,.._.a.I1d also in the matter of determining<\/p>\n
 the -.confipe_nsat.ion to the land owners whose land had<\/p>\n
 to facqnired in the context of the scheme known<\/p>\n
as constrnction of ‘elevated highway and six lane<\/p>\n
A  way on the National Highway No.7 at 8.50<\/p>\n
  kilometer’ on Bangalore I-Iosur Highway.<\/p>\n
19<\/span><\/p>\n
28. The Karnataka Lokayukta also to enquire into
\nthe conduct of the special land acquisition
\nhad passed the Award and also into the
\nbona \ufb01des of the special land aciquisitiorig V
\npassed the order at Annexure–D1zVandA*A.to
\nto its logical conclusion, to”-\u00aba:scertaiIi._if
\ndevelopment, misconduct   course
\nof such enquiry. l _ l  l h l<\/p>\n
29. The”:rrjatt<3:if is A the Karnataka
\nLokayuktal  notice of the
\nlevel   such acquisition
\nproceedings  exchequer being drained at<\/p>\n
the cost of it the 'State and the citizens, to 'enrich the<\/p>\n
  priyate persons whether they are entitled to<\/p>\n
l"sucl1gconipensa'tion or otherwise and bona \ufb01de users of<\/p>\n
land, who  the reai land owners are being left in the<\/p>\n
gluyrch 'while trespassers, outsiders, tricksters are<\/p>\n
 igcolnferred with bounties by the special land acquisition<\/p>\n
 "officer by misusing and abusing their power in an<\/p>\n
arbitrary and whimsical manner.<\/p>\n
20<\/span><\/p>\n
30. It is for this reason, the matter requires
\nfurther enquiry, investigation, scrutiny and examination
\nat the hands of the Karnataka Lokayukta, to tallieupthe<\/p>\n
proceedings to its logical conclusion.<\/p>\n
31. If any such misconduct Ki
\nfound about said land
\nopen to the State Government
\npersonaily from them if  to the
\nbene\ufb01ciaries or the   the misuse or
\nabuse of poweriby   officers.\n<\/p>\n
  is  that the first respondent<\/p>\n
should  amount already disbursed in<\/p>\n
 fav.vour..tVAof.v_ the ‘lire-spondents is recovered and kept in<\/p>\n
  the civil court, to abide by the<\/p>\n
 by the civil court for the entitlement<\/p>\n
 amongst the Various persons who \ufb01gured in the order<\/p>\n
dated 27.5.2008 [copy at Annexure W D to the writ<\/p>\n
    petition].\n<\/p>\n
21<\/span><\/p>\n
33. A writ of mandamus is issued to the first
\nrespondent — special land acquisition officer to refer the<\/p>\n
matter to the civil court in terms of subwsect’ion’v.of<\/p>\n
section 3-H of the Act and the amount it <\/p>\n
recovered forthwith from the pcf:rso’n;~ w’ho.;\u00abh:a’v’e_ al1’ead\u00a7r<\/p>\n
received to be deposited before   co1.,p1V1_\u00a7\u00bb’L_A_’p’ . 2 3′<\/p>\n
34. Such course of  initiated
\nwithin three months   outcome placed
\nbefore the ciVii”   to be placed
\nbefore the.    _with:f   reference order.<\/p>\n
35.  forthwith and at any
\nrate not later   the date of receipt of<\/p>\n
a copy of Vti\u20acais:oi”der. 3 A’<\/p>\n
Sd\/-3
\nTudge<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Sri B R Pathi vs The Special Land Acquisition … on 6 October, 2010 Author: D.V.Shylendra Kumar IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BA%\u00a7f;C”Ah’REW DATED THES THE 6″‘ DAY OF OCTOBER, 2010 BEFORE THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.v.sHYLENI)I2A KUMAH f\ufb01j A ‘ W.P.No. 9819\/2008 {LA–F:<ES}jE..:' BETWEEN: V' SR1. B.R.PA'I'HI, s\/o LATE […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-216542","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSri B R Pathi vs The Special Land Acquisition ... on 6 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sri B R Pathi vs The Special Land Acquisition ... on 6 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-10-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-06-24T11:41:18+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sri B R Pathi vs The Special Land Acquisition … on 6 October, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-06-24T11:41:18+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010\"},\"wordCount\":2726,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010\",\"name\":\"Sri B R Pathi vs The Special Land Acquisition ... on 6 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-06-24T11:41:18+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sri B R Pathi vs The Special Land Acquisition … on 6 October, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Sri B R Pathi vs The Special Land Acquisition ... on 6 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sri B R Pathi vs The Special Land Acquisition ... on 6 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-10-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-06-24T11:41:18+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sri B R Pathi vs The Special Land Acquisition … on 6 October, 2010","datePublished":"2010-10-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-06-24T11:41:18+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010"},"wordCount":2726,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010","name":"Sri B R Pathi vs The Special Land Acquisition ... on 6 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-10-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-06-24T11:41:18+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-r-pathi-vs-the-special-land-acquisition-on-6-october-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sri B R Pathi vs The Special Land Acquisition … on 6 October, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/216542","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=216542"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/216542\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=216542"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=216542"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=216542"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}