High Court Karnataka High Court

Yellappa S/O Ningappa vs State Of Karnataka, Through on 18 September, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Yellappa S/O Ningappa vs State Of Karnataka, Through on 18 September, 2008
Author: A.S.Bopanna
M unvmtw

w ww_w}» Wu' nnmvamnnm-a. mm.-zw iwwum UR" KARNATAKJQ i-"HGH CQURT OF KARNAYAKA H265"! (SOUR? (3? mmmmm HEQH Ci

 _-Iaaf (";%iJ.'I;'.«13n_AI%2." Lm"-585 102

IN THE HIGH COURT 012* KARNATAKA T _
CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA 2  k "

DATED THIS THE 131*: DAY 0;? sEPrEMBjERfJ2®; % '  '

BEFORE  

THE HONBLE MR. J(}S'I'I. ("§§2" 

W.P. No.40024[   

YELLAPPA  '  " 

s/0 PRNGAPPA KAMI3 ,  
AGED NA3f~;ou__*r 45;YEAi::s _  
OCC:A€34R£C??J¥J}13RE =:  * _ 
R!OH«'%1'¥C*F1¥'§GI{B}..'._   
TQJEEWASEGI  .   V'
DiST.G£{lA'"3i%.§§GA H V'  V .. PET!'I'l.'ONER

(By sci.R.H.§éA€>.--va.y£:uRA§;ID,;jA.R mo, mvs.)

1.

_ -STATE’ imkmxrakg THROUGH
,, cuss:-‘ SE(3RE’I’AR'{ VIDHANA sounm,

‘”BA.N<3ALORE """

– A’ icofwuxssionsa

A “1TI~IE S3-CVERETARY
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
FOR’.[}EPAR’l’MEN’I’ REVENUE

‘A rLAND’ACQUISI’I’ION
% . R/_o BLOCK No.3, v £1,002
‘:»i;’s.Bu:LmNG

BANGALORE

THE SPECIAL LANE
ACQUISITION OFFCIER,
MINI VIDHANA SOUD!-IA,
GU!BARGA~585 102

“0

5. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

MINOR HERIGATION

DEPARFMEM ox? KARMTAKA

R/0 Mibfi VIDHANA SOUDHA,

AIWANE-SHAH! Rom _ m. ‘
GULBARGA .. REsPQn,DE¢~i’r$”~ 4

{BY ss21.s.s. KUMMAN, ADDLGOVI’. Apvr:»cA}rE}, ‘

THIS “L? IS FiLED Ui~:.1;§E~z§ A§”£’.226,£§s”v_2’2€7 0P’j ‘I’HE’

consrmrrzow OF’ INQIA, PRAYING ‘DIRECT THE
Rmspoxmzm No.5 ‘ro__ srop %_’m_E.1wQRK OF~..l?ERCO1A’I’ION
TAKEN AT HANGARGA ‘(gag A15′ SY.h’Q.58″.TQ. JEWARGI, 3131*:
GULBARGA. _ -_ .A

%fm§;:.¢m% %r=-iv hearm this

This ffrr
day, the Cotgrt’ fcilmlving:-..-_____f

‘seeking amendment of the

petition applicafion for the rcasans

_ statafii the The appliwtiorn is allowed. The

for the petitioner to carry out the

au;¢ndnac;::t%r:§rt1zwim.

case of the petitioner in this petition is that

A :._«’v12je–3;éspondents have mit1a’ ‘ ted acquisititm pmceedmgs’

Wfwmf, W ..m.mm..mm imwm mwm W maammm mw mum my mmmam mew mum” M mmmmm mm M

issue of nowcation under Section 4 of the Land

.«vwuvaor.-

‘ Acquisition Act, seeking to aoqllke certain lands. Under

1

an
A

the said notification, the land bearmg $”y,.No.58

measuring 20 acres 07 guntas of Hangerm.

Jewaay Taluk is also included to a or]f:;t”1é

which is belongng to the ”

the petitioner is that

Section 4 being issued ax’iii.:VV:._t”;i1£;Vpei1’tV1i€§I:1<.:§i' filed
the objecfions to of
hearing has "°"'*%A emuiry as
he-ad. re: is in
this for 9. mandamus to
. t.§W'vconsidcr the objection
.\

" vvlemncd Gcrvemment Advocate would

_t.".1:_af'. pruvzisions contained in the Lard

V clear with regard to the nature of the
_ :to be held by the Aoqtfiring Authority and
the petificner can not mve any gievaxmoe in

. uuaVufF:_'\\c#';Ul°| 'MI! emmaumemzm nmzr! %..wUK3 EM" KP&NA?AKA H56!-i CQURT 0? KARWAVAKA EWHGH COURT OF KARMAYAEQQ Miflfi C'

since' it is the admitted' case of the pwtioner

mum"-WI

that a notifimfion under Section 4 has been

issued. 'Ihereafi;er, the law would take its own course

J2

0
Q

and therefore, no specific direction is necessary» to be

issued to consider the objections filed by

4. In this regard, on

made in the petition and kee;):i;1g:i1:…?;i¢’§$:r_.’th:é %

contained in the Land

Authority while excrcisixlg power {if domain

admittedly have under

Section 1__’Z. Q) is there would be no
need under Section
5(A) gr the M; case, it is stam that the

said pzovisiofi invoked and ifthat he so, as

_ suc1:; neadlesszostate that the Acquiring Auttmrity

comply with the procedures and

A C the final notificafion under Section’ 6

‘ ‘grid gran t compensation as per law. If the

‘ has filed his objection stafiement, it is for the

.. wwvumw -owmvcwzow

«wwgwm um mmmwmémawwa mmzm muwm WW Kmflwfiififl HIGH COMM” 0? MRNATAKA WGH COME? GF I€&RNfi.?’fia.W% Mmw 3%

to consider the same in accordance with
If the same is not considered in accordance with

law, it would always be open to the petitioner to

1:

w W”. ~ “I .wuwu v

mama wmmmmgmmm NEW??? KWMUKI L3?’ KARNATAKA MIQH COURT 0? §€ARMa%.?fi%A WEGH COURT OF KARMATAKA Hififi-1 Q

question the same if ultimately Section 6 Imtificafion is

issued Without considering the objectimi ‘Z

petitioner. Hence, keeping this aspect in s’;;;.:’.’_”‘_’*:;ei’v.
the provisions of Iaw has is i 1’.

need to issue specific directiim is

obligation of the ..i;o ‘on.’sV.’.’
that are filed by t.i’1»a__ issue of

notification.

with anmmsi T’ M ii petition stands

Sd/-s
Judge