{"id":45904,"date":"2010-10-26T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-10-25T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010"},"modified":"2018-05-28T20:59:13","modified_gmt":"2018-05-28T15:29:13","slug":"veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010","title":{"rendered":"Veerappa vs Union Of India on 26 October, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Veerappa vs Union Of India on 26 October, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: D.V.Shylendra Kumar<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA\nAT BANGALORE \n\nDated this the 26111 day Of October, 2029 T T'  ..\n\nBEFORE:\n\nTi~IE H{)N'BLE MR JUSTICE D   V'\n\nWrI'tPe\ufb01t1'On NO. 3758  _  \nBETWEEN ' ' A T' A\n\nVEERAPPA\n\nAGED ABOUT 63 YEARS   .\n\nS\/O GUDDE TI~iIMMAIAH=._  _ 2\n\nR\/AT NO.10, 11TH CROSS ._ ' .\n\nMAHALAKSHMIPURAM   '\n\nWESTOF CHORI3-ROAD 3' '  _  - \nBANGALORE--s56G'G;;OS;S.    * _  PETITIONER\n\n _ .4\" '    Adm]\n\n1. UNION OF'-\"iN\u00abII_)'IA   . .\n\nBY SECRE::fA\u00a7\u00a73f.T'O. GOVERNMENT\nROAD TRANSPORT_ ISEHIGHWAYS\nDEPARTMENT ' ._ ' \n\n, --SECRE'}'ARh?IT'OF'-SHIPPING ROAD\n\n.  \"'INSPOR'FfNG Sp HIGHWAYS\nNEW DELHI.  ..... \n\n  2'; A T 'I I _THE CLOIIQIPETENT AUTHORITY 8:\n\n-_ ISPECx1AI;'LA.ND ACQUISITION OFFICER\n.  HEIVLKFVATHI PROJECT\n NAIIONAL HIGHWAY NO.-48\n\u00a7\\EELAI\\\/LANGAIA, HASSAN DIVISION\nKLINIGAL, TUMKUR DISTRICT.  RESPONDENTS<\/pre>\n
[By Smt Syeda Shehnaz, ACGSC for R1;\n<\/p>\n
Smt Shilpa Shah, Adv. for
\nM \/ S. Singhania :3: Partners, Advs. for R2]<\/p>\n
3<\/span><\/p>\n
complaining that considerable extent of his land and<\/p>\n
building, in all measuring about 1416 sq.mtrs spreadover<\/p>\n
two survey numbers viz., Sy No 37\/ 2D and__;3’7′ V5}’1_av.e<\/p>\n
been noti\ufb01ed for acquisition by the eentr9.}’–g’,o\u00a7ierm:r1ent 9 <\/p>\n
the bene\ufb01t of national highways autlv1orit.ies”‘-ti’ndeVr=;;the 0<\/p>\n
provisions of National I”{ig1*\ufb01_2vays <\/p>\n
Act], but the proceedings  a haphazard.
\narbitrary, whimsical  manner to the
\npetitioner, to   vijleltltioner and has
\ntherefore    <\/p>\n
i), ….  _i;Ss_i1e’1-11:; turil of be-rtior\u00e9lri or writ or order<\/p>\n
‘0’r0.tg.directior1’_’t0 quash the notfication<\/p>\n
— No.SCj’ 0014835-10E} dated 26.10.2007 issued<\/p>\n
2 “by ‘me -first”-.resp”ondent published in the<\/p>\n
VW,Gdzette Extrgordinary dated 26.10.2007<\/p>\n
at-. ‘Anrtexure — H in so far as the<\/p>\n
Vv petition.__e__r’.s land in Sy.No.37\/2D and
\nV37\/2E concerned: and<\/p>\n
   any other appropriate writ or order
\n‘ for’ direction deemed fit in the
\n‘ -. \u00abizircurnstances including payment of cost.<\/p>\n
Cotktencitng that while it is always open to the public<\/p>\n
.0  “‘a1.it1*1orities to take up public causes including widening<\/p>\n
.5<\/p>\n
=: 6 _ -‘ ‘ –\n<\/p>\n
\u00a72′(*%;*<\/p>\n
4<\/span>
\nand improving of national highways, Which, the
\nrespondents claim is part of national vV.1ri’i\u00e9i’;..\\.2vays<\/p>\n
development project but at the same time__;it”sh_~o_i:1id_.v” be<\/p>\n
done in a manner contempiated by law.  non: ‘ <\/p>\n
arbitrary manner, but action taken :by.f?the,.resporie\u00a7i-ent\u00e9; in ‘<\/p>\n
the present case is arbitrary,\u00ab._jwhirnsicai,
\nagainst the petitioner, to the_f:”detrirnent \u00ab-offthe} petitioner
\nand therefore the petitioi1er’f–_ha.s vvcornepifbefore this court for<\/p>\n
relief.\n<\/p>\n
3. Noticesf: \u20ac._issued.v t’o””t’}”1’e respondents and<\/p>\n
 Partners, have entered
\nappearance for  authority, Whereas the first<\/p>\n
respondpent:’1:.nion.v” off’-inzdia though is represented by Sri<\/p>\n
‘ “-v.,5yedRg1 ighehnaz,  Central Govt Standing Counsel,<\/p>\n
  appeared before the court today for first<\/p>\n
res p.ond’e’nt.3’<\/p>\n
  Statement of objections has been filed on behalf of<\/p>\n
   second respondent contending that the acquisition of<\/p>\n
2<\/span><\/p>\n
:2<\/p>\n
5<\/span><\/p>\n
part of land and building belonging to the petitioner is for<\/p>\n
the purpose of widening of existing highway invto,l,:.a\u00bb,.four–<\/p>\n
lane highway from KM 28.00 to KM <\/p>\n
[Nelamangala to Hassan section]; that~th,e::’.,rn’inistIyp:”of<\/p>\n
shipping, road transport and  ~w\u00a5\u00bb\u00a7ri.th i’<\/p>\n
this project and had ca1Lise_d ac.qijisVitio’n’
\nexercising the power under    3 of the
\nAct by issue of    declaring its
\nintention to acquire the   the schedule to
\nthe    notified, objections
\ninvited,  _ ”   acquisition proceedings
\nprocessed.  the petition averrnents are<\/p>\n
incorrect,’penrerse\ufb02gvithyaut substance; that the project of<\/p>\n
 widening the ro’ad.,,i$.v’i3\u20acing Jarried on in consonance with<\/p>\n
  ..par_ai:r1’et\u00e9rs_ set by the Indian Road Congress and the<\/p>\n
 report has been prepared by a team, of<\/p>\n
 expertsliiand consultants, keeping in Vi\u20acW the geometric<\/p>\n
A X1′ ” \u00a7{iz;,’,”Vertical and horizontal curves, topography of area and<\/p>\n
l  design, speed etc; that all technical details have been kept<\/p>\n
6<\/span>
\nin mind; that while it is a fact that the petitioner had filed
\nhis objections to the proposal, the petitioner HhaT.s*r.been<\/p>\n
heard, but his objections have been rejected <\/p>\n
land acquisition officer and therea.fte.r’:”~.,<\/p>\n
proceedings have been \ufb01nalizedlandrothedtprqiect’inanagder ‘<\/p>\n
of the highways authority  order’.\n<\/p>\n
the objections; that ‘thereai\u20actei;.,:_  proceedings
\nhave been \ufb01nalized;  of the petitioner
\nthat the road tgakes  place Where
\nthe petitioneirfgfg hiui.1\u00abdi1ig’ismlocated, is incorrect;
\nthat  curves are ail keeping
\nin View 2 the Widening the road and<\/p>\n
straightening  a copy of the alignment plan<\/p>\n
 of ‘=atv.___t…}l1ut plot, produced at Annexure-Ri to<\/p>\n
  st_ateine’13.t of objections, is testimony of the<\/p>\n
responderitjsjelonduct and action to develop the proposed<\/p>\n
 fourl–lan’e  the highway, keeping in mind the geometry of<\/p>\n
A tlaelroad for the purpose of widening and also to ensure<\/p>\n
‘  the improvement of horizontal curves and minimizing the<\/p>\n
\u00a7(‘.r<\/p>\n
7<\/span><\/p>\n
curves wherever it is inevitable etc., in terms of para-5 of<\/p>\n
the statement of objections, reading as under:<\/p>\n
5. Paragraph 9 to 11: The allegations made
\nby the petitioner is perverse and without any
\nsubstance. It is submitted that the alignrrien.t’rofr._V
\nthe proposed 4-lane carriageway has
\ndecided as per the parameters laid dawri-\u00ab :_.
\nIndian Road Congress and on the “Dletailedlt
\nProject Report prepared by team.-“‘of:jExperty
\nConsultants keeping in v:’\u00a3elw”‘geo’me_trics._ viz–,-T: A
\nvertical & horizontal ‘\u00bb.__curves,
\ntopography of area and design speedy ‘etc:.”–~ ‘
\nFurther in order to atioid minimize wasta’g,e of
\nexisting carriageway, the .proposecl~. o {–‘i;–lane  is
\ndesigned in such a way___that the existing 2}?-lane
\nCarma’ geway is.’n3tair1ed to j’th’e,_extent”fesibile
\nand additional\u00bb  .24-lane’, “carriageway is
\nconstructed. In accordance with same, the
\nexisting carriageway beeii retained and the
\nnew cai’rid\u00a7Z\u20ac’way hasrlbeen’ proposed on the left
\nhand. \u00ab–<sid\u00e9lj_,o__f * ex_isting._" carriageway with a
\nrnedian .:;_qt 4;;-5   'submitted that the
\nacqr4is'ition'1-Igf _th_e properties as notified in 3-D
\nnotification  inevitablefor the propsed Right of
\nWay of 6\u20acfiri,'iIt "further submitted that the
\nexisting roadjjis "serpentine with five horizontal
\ncurves within at distance of one kilometer. Under
\n.the proposed "4–laning of the highway the
\n georrietry"'of,,t_liieVroad is also being improved by
\nV appropriately positioning the new carriageway
\n   "to minimize or improve the horizontal
\n_ ylACii:TZ?v\u00a2S_.AV.l'-T318 copy of the alignment plan of the
\n national highway at this stretch is produced
\nh__er'e.w'ith and marked as Annexure–R1<\/p>\n
8<\/span><\/p>\n
It is, therefore. prayed for dismissal of the petition, as the<\/p>\n
petition is without merit etc.<\/p>\n
5. To the statement of objections, a suppief:’3.e’ntary<\/p>\n
memo for placing on record copies of the”:-fo\u00a31oWi’1ig””–‘si:;.<\/p>\n
documents is appended:\n<\/p>\n
1.<\/p>\n
_{5′:\n<\/p>\n
 ‘Consolidat’ed report by<\/p>\n
Objections \ufb01led by the  i”i–i
\nthe Asst. Com1jnissione’r_vCtnd Competent;
\nAuthority. ‘ ‘ ‘ ”\n<\/p>\n
Notice underj Section.’ ‘Ctfor heczfixig  the
\nobjections.  — A ”\n<\/p>\n
Minutes off they 1.he’\u00a2iri:%ig\u00ae by Asst.
\nCommissioner c_tr1d..Cotnpeterc1t Authority.<\/p>\n
-.   ‘  response to the
\n* petitio11er’s’ –o\u00a3igj’eetion.\n<\/p>\n
 by the Asst. Commissioner
\nV and”Co_tnp.etent Authority.\n<\/p>\n
the Asst.\n<\/p>\n
” Commissioner and Competent Authority\n<\/p>\n
–“cj–;after publication of notification under
\n Section 3A and hearing of objections<\/p>\n
under Section 3C of NH Act.\n<\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
as one proceeds from Nagamangala to Hassan and has
\nsubmitted that the proposed action instead of either
\nstraightening a curve or minimizing a curve, has only<\/p>\n
resulted in deepening the curve, by deliberately.’e:$sjteriz:ling<\/p>\n
the curve into the property of the petitione–r;l4Atli:\u00e9i’t~:l <\/p>\n
being done, only due to political 1f_ival.I_’y  ‘ . <\/p>\n
the petitioner, a person having   <\/p>\n
party”, which is opposed tolthvegoartjf in “at the<\/p>\n
relevant point of time, whichll”_con’trols the. respondent-
\nauthority; that the biased   action is Very<\/p>\n
obvious on the -face of the _lI:fI\u20acC()4Il”(3l’.”‘\u00a3_3.VS.\u20aclJ\u20aclJ.’1 when there was<\/p>\n
a possibili–ty  road at the particular place.<\/p>\n
the curv\u00e9*.i_4sl .deepei1._e’d.:_ll.to the utmost detriment of the<\/p>\n
 petitioner; V thnalt’-usucli action will result in not only<\/p>\n
 ‘acq’Liiring~icorisiderably more than the required extent of<\/p>\n
petitioner’sf_lah”d, but also will result in demolition of a<\/p>\n
l.V_?choulltri;\/kdlyana mantap constructed by the petitioner for<\/p>\n
A ..ffthVel’bene\ufb01t and welfare of the people of the surrounding<\/p>\n
 villages; that it will also result in considerable financial<\/p>\n
J<\/p>\n
9<\/span><\/p>\n
1 1
\nloss to the petitioner etc., but instead of avoiding the
\nunnecessary acquisition of land only to enhance the<\/p>\n
curve. it would have been proper and even easier__’_1’o?r,_the<\/p>\n
authority to straighten the road at that    <\/p>\n
be, should acquire the land on the  l<\/p>\n
but acquisition of the land,’on_ the “left A road <\/p>\n
that spot where the petitionerl’s_Vlpl’anVd an\u00e9\ufb01llkdlyana mantap<\/p>\n
is situated is being deliljeraltely\u00bb do-neA”to_har1n the interest<\/p>\n
of the petitioner,  h\n<\/p>\n
8. In this  c_oign’sei”for the petitioner has<\/p>\n
drawn:’l”‘niy”eA th._e””‘following portion of the
\nobjections ..plla\u00abce’dV,.—the special land acquisition
\nof\ufb01cer;\n<\/p>\n
‘–It  ‘learn: from the civil engineering<\/p>\n
it that while widening any road, the<\/p>\n
  piinciple adopted is to measure the
\nA7..l’exVtent. Qflwtdentng from the middle of the road
\n so,~tht:ttAthe aggrieved persons do not accuse of<\/p>\n
” any favoritism or arbitrariness in the process of<\/p>\n
A aequisition. However, in the present acquisition,
\nA  an extent of 200 feet is acquired on the
\nsouthern side of the road while an extent of 50
\nfeet is proposed to be acquired on the northern<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
side of the road. You are informed that my
\nbuilding lies within the southern margin while
\nthere are no buildings within the northern
\nmargin. Thus there is no justification fo:f”Vttte””.,
\nacquisition to be made dtsproportionatety._and.i  _
\nthis has resulted in unwanted curves, bends’  : ‘
\nthe proposed road.   V’ <\/p>\n
9. Learned counsel for the peti\u00abtio}fier<\/p>\n
the manner in which the-._\ufb02p’Qwer.” ayai.luai::{le”.._dunder the<\/p>\n
provisions of the Act  fbr drawing
\nplans by the  the faulty and
\nmala fde manneijof respondents, not
\nonly in   statutory powers under
\nthe  and preparation
\nof plan}  plan drawings at the<\/p>\n
place. where t_:he.peti’vtiofier’s land is located and lying in<\/p>\n
 the stretchlv of the national highway from KM<\/p>\n
  clearly indicates that the proposed plan<\/p>\n
ske=tchj.:is faulty; that even a layperson can observe<\/p>\n
“that road which could have been otherwise proceeded<\/p>\n
  st1’ai\u00a7ht has unnecessarily taken a left leap and curve at<\/p>\n
5<\/span><\/p>\n
<.":*~'.\n<\/p>\n
.’\\ ‘
\ni’<\/p>\n
13<\/span><\/p>\n
that point; that the mala fide action is writ large on the
\nface of the record and therefore the action taken by the
\nauthority for exercising power for acquisition of land in<\/p>\n
between this stretch is vitiated by arbitrary  of<\/p>\n
exercise of power and for the purpose not e.ri.visaged:l <\/p>\n
the object and intention of the noti\ufb01_cati_on’fo:rjVacqriisit.ion\u00bb pp <\/p>\n
and deserves to be quashed.\n<\/p>\n
10. It is also submitted llb3r’*pointi1igl”‘  record,
\nparticularly docurx1ent:’_”i\\1o  of hearing by the
\ncompetent authority,   to the learned<\/p>\n
counsel for    land acquisition<\/p>\n
officer himself lhald.\n<\/p>\n
27-12007 l\u00b0Cdse.calledVl”‘<\/p>\n
 . Petitioner’ present. Z.P. member<\/p>\n
 ‘Advocate RM. presents [sic].\n<\/p>\n
  ” Objections \ufb01led. Needs second<\/p>\n
‘  thought for alignment of road. His<\/p>\n
~ Exhoultry constructed spending 1.5<\/p>\n
crores. Land of 7 lakhs. If road<\/p>\n
alignment is altered it would<\/p>\n
some [sic] choultry. There is bend
\nwhich can be straightened.\n<\/p>\n
fx<\/p>\n
1 1.\n<\/p>\n
learned counsel for the petitione.r’ri’s..tha.-“llland ‘ ;
\nacquisition officer himself had that  <\/p>\n
the road involves a bend     be’<\/p>\n
14<\/span><\/p>\n
Filed objections.\n<\/p>\n
Sd\/–\n<\/p>\n
S.L.A.O.\n<\/p>\n
as. Nayaic.\n<\/p>\n
Sd\/ —\n<\/p>\n
Veerappa.\n<\/p>\n
Based on this noting, submission of  <\/p>\n
straightened etc. It  also  thatlevciij while the<\/p>\n
acquiring authority wasi40rww.Vp’Litting corrective<\/p>\n
measures, it  very  \ufb01led on behalf of<\/p>\n
the national  by its project director,<\/p>\n
which had res;u1te:Ei”in”‘ih’e rejecfioia order as under:<\/p>\n
Heard ~ themgjectiori: The project director NHAI<\/p>\n
 in this letter dated 14-3-2007 has replied that\n<\/p>\n
–  acquisitianofland is based on alignment of<\/p>\n
p_roposed 4–laning of NH –48 and the land<\/p>\n
  essential for the project and hence
\nQ” =._’C(:lIlf_l’O\u20ac bzeldropped from acquisition. Hence the
\nA  requ.es;ted<\/p>\n
” considered [sic].\n<\/p>\n
of the applicant cannot be<\/p>\n
i ” ‘  oI:y’ection is disallowed.\n<\/p>\n
Sd\/ –\n<\/p>\n
15<\/span><\/p>\n
Special Land Acquisition Officer
\nand Competent Authority,
\nNH48, Nel.amangala–Hassan Sectiorp
\nKunigal, Tumkur District  = <\/p>\n
This order is again Vitiated etc., and further <\/p>\n
proceedings based on such OI’d\u20acI’.<iS depfectiveiiandi deserves ' ; <\/p>\n
to be quashed.\n<\/p>\n
12. Appearing on behalf;  s_econd.: ur.:espondent4d<\/p>\n
authority, Ms Shilpa: coiiiivseiii has very
\nvehemently submitted’   is at a Very
\nadvanced sta_g\u00ab;-iyipthat “has already been
\ncompleted   is not reflected in<\/p>\n
the statexnentvof that had been filed earlier, the<\/p>\n
present ipoysittion”  through the memo placed<\/p>\n
 befotfe the  today and as indicated by Sri<\/p>\n
 \u00bb-JjN’aiaitin1nar;”*-project director, who is present before the<\/p>\n
  been brought before the court by the<\/p>\n
 authority “for expiaining the technical aspects of the<\/p>\n
 V\u00bbpiroje.ct etc; that there is absoiuteiy nothing wrong with the<\/p>\n
 acquisition proceedings: that every procedure is<\/p>\n
16<\/span><\/p>\n
meticulously followed: that convenience or inconvenience
\nto a land owner whose land or building may be loaipi\u00e9ited on<\/p>\n
the highway or in the vicinity of the highw-;i:Y+_4’Qp;\u00e9’y_l_olri:_:vthe<\/p>\n
sidelines of the highway, which is  ‘._i’olr’..gV1l<\/p>\n
developmental purpose, cannot beygla “coi1sider.ation__in l’<\/p>\n
determining the legality or’  of
\nproceedings; that the entirellpr’oj:ect_  hfnalized on
\nobtaining able expertgui”d_arice;_panii  when once
\nthe validity of the ac:quvis,iti.0n.  are not found
\nwanting, there’   to interfere with
\nthe  the project and courts
\ncannoltggsit.  -the decisions of experts and
\ntechnical”p:ersori’st  up of road plan etc., have<\/p>\n
all ,b\u00a7elen’.done’ ‘in\ufb01con:sultation with the technical experts<\/p>\n
 _’there–,is~-no scope for interference by courts in a<\/p>\n
lhiatterllloihthisl”nature; that the allegation of rnala fide is<\/p>\n
 notnjiadehlllgood by impleading necessary persons by<\/p>\n
A ..j”l.na’rnes, no particular averment or allegation of mala\ufb01de<\/p>\n
 ids; levelled against any particular person in the petition<\/p>\n
1 7
\nand in this Vi\u20acW of the matter. the writ petition deserves to
\nbe dismissed; that the petition is more an irnpedinient for<\/p>\n
development Work rather than espousing an-y..’13gi’ti’n:1’ate<\/p>\n
cause or grievance of the petitioner; without <\/p>\n
merit, frivolous and deserves to be d’isrnj.is’-sed,’  4′    f<\/p>\n
13. In support of the su’orr_1issions’,=. 1earr;eat’\u00a2ou’ns\u00e91i ‘fort’<\/p>\n
second respondent has placedreiianee’  judgment of
\nthe Supreme Court inithe   BHATTA
\nvs STATE or  [A1″R7..1Vs97 so 1236] to<\/p>\n
submit that    judgment, there is<\/p>\n
no scopeViVI”or..}’the’7eo11_rt.:t’o interfere with a matter of this
\nnature:-r Learned A:co_u’nsie\u00bbl.has placed a strong reliance on<\/p>\n
the Aobservtatieon ..ci–on’tained in para–10 of the judgment,<\/p>\n
. –   …..\n<\/p>\n
  “!3’efore parting with this case, we think it
\n*  necessary to make a few observations relevant
\n to.~Zanjdacquisition proceedings. Our country is<\/p>\n
now launched upon an ambitious programme<\/p>\n
x j of. all round economic advancement to make<\/p>\n
“‘\u00ab–._our economy competitive in the world market.<\/p>\n
  We are anxious to attract foreign direct<\/p>\n
investment to the maximum extent. We propose<\/p>\n
18<\/span><\/p>\n
to compete with China economically. We wish
\nto attain the pace of progress achieved by some<\/p>\n
of the Asian countries, referred to as ”Asian_
\ntigers”, e.g., South Korea, Taiwan
\nSingapore. it is, however, recognised  \u00bballt-C’;
\nhands that the infrastructure necessary  <\/p>\n
sustaining such a pace of progress _is_w~o_efully_<\/p>\n
lacking in our country..,\u00bbAA\u00bbThe  of;
\ntransportation, power and ;;:’on1rnun13C_atio’n_s”are”‘,,, _ A
\nin dire need of substantialC”impro_vc.ment,”~.,_A”C
\nexpansion and rriodeznisation. Thesei things} ‘<\/p>\n
very often call for acquisition of land anldfthatl
\ntoo without any delay.  _howev_er,’ “C natural
\nthat in most of these  the’~pe.rsons
\naffected challeng,e\u00a7–the-‘_ ax;quis_ition proceedings
\nin Courts. These challenges’ are generally in the
\nshape of writ pet.it1’_o~ns’ .fil,ed.””in”High Courts.
\ninvariably, stay \ufb01of  is asked for and
\nin some  ‘;oi’ders,_lb.y” way of stay or
\niry’un”ction-.ar””e’.\/,_al3Q–\u00ab.__made.  atever may have
\nbeen the\u00bb~p?:actices in thepast, a time has come
\nwhe’re,the C'(:~urts’.s’hould”‘keep the larger public
\ninterestl’inm_in.d’whi.le –exercising their power of
\ngranting . s’tay\/linjunction. The power under
\nArticle i226″–is”‘discretionary. It will be exercised<\/p>\n
portly in fu_rth.eranc’\u00ab\u00e9 of interests of justice and
\n not merely, on the making out of a legal point.
\n ‘And  the matter of land acquisition for public<\/p>\n
purposes, the interests of justice and the public<\/p>\n
  –in”terest,.c(_;:alesce. They are very often one and\n<\/p>\n
-ythe .”_same. Even in a Civil Suit, granting of<\/p>\n
iry’u.ncjtion or other similar orders, more<\/p>\n
 particularly of an interlocutory nature, is<\/p>\n
equally discretionary. The courts have to weigh<\/p>\n
it  the public interest vis-a-vis the private interest
\n while exercising the power under Article 226 –<\/p>\n
indeed any of their discretionary powers. It<\/p>\n
19<\/span><\/p>\n
may even by open to the High Court to direct,<\/p>\n
in case it finds fnally that the acquisition was
\nvitiated on account of non–compiianee with
\nsome legal requirement that the persons
\ninterested shall also be entitled to a porticulrtih
\namount of damages to be awarded as a
\nsum or calculated at a certain percentage\u00bb .of-‘jg  ,
\ncompensation payable. There are    A
\nof affording appropriate relief and redres.sinq=a ~ K
\nwrong; quashing the acquisition proceedtng””is_’  V
\nnot the only mode of re<;'f.ress.'To\u00ab_wit,..__it.,is"V__
\nultimately a matter of balaneingjthe  it
\ninterest. Beyond this, itis neither possible nor': V
\nadvisable to say. We "tr_ustwthat~.theee'
\nConsiderations will be    by<\/p>\n
the Courts while dealir:.–g,"vzuith challenges to
\nacquisition proceedings.  ,  ~ V <\/p>\n
14. Origina} record is,’ a1s:;’i \u00a7a1aced7.,’t\u00bbefore the court.<\/p>\n
indicating’    design of the road in<\/p>\n
respect”,ot’._the.  .NH48 lying in between KM<\/p>\n
49.474; to   Wfithtireference to the sketch and plan,<\/p>\n
 \u00ab..,it  veheInent’1y’e,sserted by Ms Shilpe. Shah, learned<\/p>\n
 seejend respondent that the curve of the road<\/p>\n
at  is very necessary and it sub~serves the<\/p>\n
V”‘\u00bbpurpose:s’ of an overali project and such assertion is also<\/p>\n
 V-sot1\u00e91l1t to be bolstered by the version of Sr}; Jwalakumar,<\/p>\n
\u00a7<\/p>\n
20<\/span><\/p>\n
Project Manager, who. it is claimed is an executive
\nengineer and a technical person, to submit tha.t’–.gmere<\/p>\n
straightening of a possible curve of the road ate.’<\/p>\n
point ie. stretch of NH48 lying in betweenI}iM’  <\/p>\n
KM 50 is not the thing, but the’\u00a5enti_re plan’ ‘b<\/p>\n
one is required to be exair1ineti._V;i1: a _
\nmanner; that a curve before a\ufb02curve after<\/p>\n
this stretch are all  :’b_t>Tkf3pt  hlind While<\/p>\n
deciding the stretch of road<\/p>\n
and whether  avoid the curve at<\/p>\n
that   opinion is to provide<\/p>\n
for  a_  it is being carried out etc.<\/p>\n
15. I   through the original records,<\/p>\n
plangand the “‘e::\u00a7tractV:of the sketch\/plan of the proposed<\/p>\n
  road, a copy of which is produced at<\/p>\n
  writ petition, which in respect of the<\/p>\n
V –V stretch NH48 lying in between KM 49.474 to KM 50 of<\/p>\n
 ‘:j.theo—highway and even on a comparison and combined<\/p>\n
. gm<\/p>\n
21<\/span><\/p>\n
viewing of these two plans and sketch, it is very obvious
\neven to the naked eye of a layperson that theagroad is<\/p>\n
taking a left curve at the point where <\/p>\n
property is located and again coming  of the\u00bb <\/p>\n
highway at KM 50 stone. Nothlingieojuldg  ‘4<\/p>\n
having a straight stretch of roadtvirilthe  between,<\/p>\n
KM 49.474 to KM 50, but   and
\nnot made good on   be hidden under
\nthe so~cal1ed technical…  advice, the
\ncurve is    even to my
\nunderstandin2g”:.,.”\ufb01ges   worthwhile purpose,
\nbut orziithe    and diametrically opposed
\nto the  of’ and reducing curves and<\/p>\n
assnrnirig that ~ there was a curve earlier in the original<\/p>\n
 whii-e__widening, when it is possible to straighten<\/p>\n
 these two kilometer points and should<\/p>\n
‘V have ‘oeen.’attempted and it is this obvious thing which<\/p>\n
 “fiends, credence to the allegation of the petitioner, which<\/p>\n
*  thelpetitioner had made at the earliest point of time even<\/p>\n
22<\/span><\/p>\n
while filing his objections before the special land
\nacquisition officer that the road is taking a deliberate left
\ncurve at the place the property of the petitioner is located
\nonly to harm the interest of the petitioner due
\nrivalry that has \u20acXiSt\u20acCl between the petitioner
\nwielding influence with the natioinalphighwayl”aiithoritiesl,”\u00bb <\/p>\n
due to their political affiliations  A it’<\/p>\n
16. Whether such avernient’s:’and allegatilonsfiare made
\ngood by naming any pe’rson;’lorlV_othperiivise, leglal\ufb02llrnizzla \ufb01des
\nare writ large on the faee of r’ecorlii,._lin the authority<\/p>\n
persistirngiiii.th’e.roadil_nayi highway with the curve
\nonly so”.as.to  land of the petitioner is<\/p>\n
acquired and the_buil_ding of the petitioner is demolished<\/p>\n
‘l V’ ‘-for no’ cause; for noptirpose and for no one’s bene\ufb01t, but<\/p>\n
 cont}? to  dletriinent of the petitioner.<\/p>\n
.4 17. .l4″\\?..\\f1*iile;4l.lthis court does not sit in appeal over the<\/p>\n
 llufopinion “of any expert nor this court takes over the<\/p>\n
 administration or the manner of implementation of a<\/p>\n
23<\/span><\/p>\n
project nor is the court concerned with the details of policy
\nmaking, nor even as to the manner in which the road is to
\nbe laid as to in what manner, it should run whose
\nproperty, whether the road is to take a curve <\/p>\n
curve or a bend, which are all, as  <\/p>\n
Supreme Court, are matters b_e\u00bbst.__1eft.”.toW ands.<\/p>\n
persons conversant with si,1chf
\nadministrators, who  A.”a.l__l ‘ iacjtionsb
\nnevertheless, all such” actionxf,”‘\u00a7ind.._’.funcAti’o.n.-‘tipon the
\nadministrative side:   review of<\/p>\n
administrative’ action {and_has_\u00b0tof..ne’cessarily answer the<\/p>\n
test of-._faim.es’s,-\u00abvanvdp”n_one7arbitrar*iness in State action,<\/p>\n
failing   inevitably hit by Article 14 of<\/p>\n
 the C{onstitutio1ii._ot India.\n<\/p>\n
  l’ 14io~,.vv;orthwhile explanation forthcoming for the<\/p>\n
retention  curve at the particular place, but on the<\/p>\n
3″*”~.__V”face of  such a retention being to the detriment and<\/p>\n
A  of the petitioner and though the petitioner has been<\/p>\n
24<\/span><\/p>\n
making persistent efforts to instill a sense of fairness and
\nproper action to be taken on the part of the author.ity\u00bb,.that
\nhaving failed. the petitioner has approached it\n<\/p>\n
19. This court. acting as a guardian of i
\nhaving a constitutional rnaridate\ufb02to
\nliberty of citizens, has a duty -to pelrfolrin to.
\n\ufb02exing administrative authoritiesy  “then abuse
\nand misuse of powerVi;s._zsoughtV’_pt:o”‘camou\ufb02aged the so-
\ncalled technical .expertisel:.grp  even otherwise
\nand to     it illaluthorities, public
\n4statiu:t’orylfunctionaries always act only
\nin conslonlance:  provisions, exercise such<\/p>\n
statutory powelrs .a;:1d’*adininistrative powers in a fair, 11on-<\/p>\n
 \u00ab..g1rbiit.raryV.m’anner;lthat they do not misuse or abuse their<\/p>\n
 ipoweri\u00bb–.favo2ir_1..one and to victirnize another person and<\/p>\n
ultirriateiy  ensure that public authorities always act in<\/p>\n
 larger public interest, eschewing private and personal<\/p>\n
 _ lliniterest.\n<\/p>\n
25<\/span><\/p>\n
20. Proper exercise and utilization of statutory powers is
\nnot the manner of conduct of second respondent\u00e9iiiin the<\/p>\n
present case. Even the special land acqtiis’iti~on..J:ofiicer<\/p>\n
had occasion to record the need that  can<\/p>\n
straightened and the bend CEi1″1:’.I:’36 “1itV}_iat i’
\nthe curve can be avoided. _  V    it 3 ‘V\n<\/p>\n
21. Though Ms Shilpa  ‘co_Vtu’nseiVf\u00a7for second
\nrespondent, seeks  recording by the
\nspecial land acquisiitiori   version of the
\npetitioner  44  detract from the
\nrecording  acquisition officer, as his
\nsignature of such recording and it is<\/p>\n
veiyijpitntich   note sheets extract which is placed<\/p>\n
 \u00bbb;ei})_re.,the ‘court by the Very second respondent. in fact, it<\/p>\n
“-therc’a;’ftei?.,vV’v the very officer has passed orders<\/p>\n
 subseqiiently, rejecting such objections for the reason that<\/p>\n
 \u00abproject director of the nationai highway authority has<\/p>\n
26<\/span>
\nstrongiy pleaded for overlooldng the objection, as they
\nhave already finalized the plan etc.<\/p>\n
22. In this background. even the submission..”4oft’_learried<\/p>\n
counsel for second respondent that the_.proj..ectl_l.’is4 in<\/p>\n
advanced stage and therefore  ‘4
\ndoes not carry conviction; as i._lsl’not
\nproject is going to be   corrective
\nmeasures. if an taken, if an
\nillegal action has been is misused or<\/p>\n
abused.\n<\/p>\n
23. ft-‘:}ven–   nevertheless, it is the duty of
\nthis courtto correct’  to permit only such actions of<\/p>\n
administrative ‘authorities which are law conforming alone<\/p>\n
to be  to sustain and it is also equally necessary<\/p>\n
  to realize its mistake and not to keep<\/p>\n
 trudging blindly in the wrong direction, but to head in the<\/p>\n
 \u00bb right direction, as it is always said ‘better late than never’.<\/p>\n
27<\/span><\/p>\n
24\u00bb. The acquisition of land for the purpose of widening
\nNH48 particularly the stretch between KM 49.47’\u00ab\u00a7i.”‘to KM
\n50 is clearly vitiated by arbitrariness Lfitfie
\nexercise of power for such acquisition
\nwhich it is exercised and the   .\n<\/p>\n
so–ca1Ied design and plan,’ <\/p>\n
\ufb02awed .\n<\/p>\n
25. Therefore, such’:’proc_eedii1–\u00a7sinunderithej impugned
\nnoti\ufb01cation in respect of’   the highway<\/p>\n
between KM 4    quashed by issue<\/p>\n
of a writ” ‘ofii:,cert:iora’1*i1″”buthdiibverty is reserved to the
\nrespondents V1  corrective measure and to go<\/p>\n
ahead, after proper raiotification to sub–serve the overall<\/p>\n
 V’  .objeet 0f~.Wi’denirig”of’the road and straightening the curves<\/p>\n
 i.ett;..,uk.eepingwi_n_j..view the observations made in this order<\/p>\n
 by  that the road does not take an<\/p>\n
xi””.__V”unnec.eis_sa1y curve; that it does not take an avoidable<\/p>\n
  The judgment of the Supreme Court, on which<\/p>\n
28<\/span><\/p>\n
reliance is placed by learned counsel for second
\nrespondent, in no way furthers the case of the.p’p’.second
\nrespondent in the present case, as a
\nobservation of the Supreme Court is
\ngiven to a public authority  it  ‘1 ii
\nwhimsical and irrational manner.lll”*.lllo
\nan arbitrary action of a  is in
\nviolation of Article 14   of <\/p>\n
26. All courtsyand   function<\/p>\n
under the autfiori_tyf:lv’estecl in them under the<\/p>\n
Constitutioniliandlino laLithority””clan claim immunity from
\nthe operation of thieyprov-i.sions of the Constitution. While<\/p>\n
it is desirableyvth at ourlcountry also requires development,<\/p>\n
  gearl”up”to the levels of global competitors and<\/p>\n
-keep’  if not in the forefront at least in the<\/p>\n
coznpany  forerunner, that cannot be achieved at the<\/p>\n
 oftranipling of the rights of the citizens, violating<\/p>\n
ll statutory provisions, even violating the constitutional<\/p>\n
29<\/span><\/p>\n
mandate and such action will de\ufb01nitely be frowned upon<\/p>\n
and voided by courts even in exercise of jurisdiction of<\/p>\n
judicial review of administrative action. \u00a7’i’}<1ifsj..__ii'swl' _._o1a.e<\/p>\n
classic case where such power is Very n.ec_essa'ri:1y._ tovibe, <\/p>\n
exercised and it is accordingly exerciisedfj.  1 i '<\/p>\n
27. Writ petition ai10wed.by.___iss1i’i:ig” a wriit’ ceritiorarit\u00bb<\/p>\n
to quash the acquisition proc’e,edi.r1gsdiiidrespect of the
\nstretch of the highway”ii”betweg;:\u00a77 “i{M’A:t’4.9.474 to KM 50,
\nreserving libertyaas ir1dic.21ted’–e;i)_o4\u00a7}ev_ ivfeivour of second<\/p>\n
respondent_._   Noviiorder as to costs.<\/p>\n
Sd\/~
\nJUDGE<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Veerappa vs Union Of India on 26 October, 2010 Author: D.V.Shylendra Kumar IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE Dated this the 26111 day Of October, 2029 T T’ .. BEFORE: Ti~IE H{)N’BLE MR JUSTICE D V’ WrI’tPe\ufb01t1’On NO. 3758 _ BETWEEN ‘ ‘ A T’ A VEERAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 […]<\/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-45904","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nVeerappa vs Union Of India on 26 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\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Veerappa vs Union Of India on 26 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-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=\"2010-10-25T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-05-28T15:29:13+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=\"22 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Veerappa vs Union Of India on 26 October, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-28T15:29:13+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010\"},\"wordCount\":4341,\"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\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010\",\"name\":\"Veerappa vs Union Of India on 26 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-28T15:29:13+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Veerappa vs Union Of India on 26 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Veerappa vs Union Of India on 26 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\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Veerappa vs Union Of India on 26 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-10-25T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-05-28T15:29:13+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":"22 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Veerappa vs Union Of India on 26 October, 2010","datePublished":"2010-10-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-28T15:29:13+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010"},"wordCount":4341,"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\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010","name":"Veerappa vs Union Of India on 26 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-10-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-28T15:29:13+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/veerappa-vs-union-of-india-on-26-october-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Veerappa vs Union Of India on 26 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/45904","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=45904"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/45904\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=45904"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=45904"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=45904"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}