Karnataka High Court
Shri. Pillamunishamappa Alias ... vs State Of Karnataka on 21 December, 2021
Bench: Ashok S.Kinagi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK.S.KINAGI
WRIT PETITION NO.22273 OF 2021 (LA-KIADB)
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI. PILLAMUNISHAMAPPA ALIAS PILLAPPA
S/O LATE RAMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS
2. SHRI. N. SHAMANNA
S/O LATE NARAYANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT
BANDIKODIGEHALLI VILLAGE
JALA HOBLI
BENGALURU NORTH TALUK
BENGALURU-562149.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.SRIHARI.A.V, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES
VIKASA SOUDHA
BENGALURU-560 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
2. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS
DEVELOPMENT BOARD
EAST WING, KHANIJA BHAVAN
RACE COURSE ROAD
2
BENGALURU-560001
REPRESENTED BY ITS
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITON OFFICER-2
KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS
DEVELOPMENT BOARD,
NO.39 SHANTHI GRUHA
BHARATH SCOUTS AND GUIDES BUILDING
4TH FLOOR, PALACE ROAD
BENGALURU-560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.SESHU, HCGP FOR R1
SRI. C.RAMAKRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND 3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO DECLARING THAT THE PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION
DATED 03.11.2006 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND FINAL
NOTIFICATION DATED 07.05.2007 VIDE ANNEXURE-B
ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT IN RESPECT OF THE
PETITONERS LAND BEARING SY.NO.46 MEASURING 2
ACRES 12 GUNTAS SITUATED AT BANDIKODIGEHALLI
VILLAGE, JALA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK AS
ABANDONED, LAPSED AND NON-EST AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Sri.Seshu, learned HCGP accepts notice for
respondent No.1. Sri. C.Ramakrishna, learned counsel
accepts notice for respondent Nos.2 and 3.
Learned counsel for the parties jointly submits that
matter is covered by judgment of Co-ordinate bench of this
Court in W.P.No.10583/2016 disposed of on 01.04.2021
and submits that this writ petition shall be disposed of in
terms of order dated 01.04.2021 passed in
W.P.No.10583/2016.
2. Brief facts leading to filing of this writ petition
are that:
Petitioners are the absolute owners of the land
measuring 2 acres, 12 guntas in Sy.No.46 of
Bandikodigehalli village, Jala Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk.
The petitioners have purchased the same under registered
sale deed and they are in continuous possession and
enjoyment of the schedule property. Respondent No.1
issued Preliminary Notification dated 03.11.2006, followed
by a final Notification dated 07.05.2007, proposing to
acquire the lands belonging to petitioners along with the
other lands without considering the objections filed by the
petitioners contending that lands are all fertile the lands
and should not be acquired for any industrial purpose.
Respondent-authorities even after lapse of 15 years have
not passed the award and have not deposited the
compensation and in view of the same, the scheme for
scheduled properties were notified as abandoned by the
respondent-Authority. Petitioner being aggrieved by the
preliminary and final notification has filed this writ petition.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. It is not in dispute that the preliminary
notification was issued on 03.11.2006 followed by final
notification on 07.05.2007. The respondent No.3 even
after lapse of 15 years has not passed an award and
compensation has not been paid to the petitioners and
possession of schedule property was not taken by the
respondent Nos.2 and 3. As such, the acquisition
proceedings have not been completed so far.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed
reliance on the decision of this Court in case of Special
Land Acquisition Officer V/s Alokam Venkayamma in
W.A.6387/2017 disposed of on 07.03.2018 and
Special Land Acquisition Officer Vs. K.B.Lingaraju in
W.A.No.6819/2017 disposed of on 04.02.2020.
6. The Hon'ble Division Bench, in the light of the
undisputed facts and circumstances, I am of the
considered opinion that impugned acquisition proceedings
in respect of schedule property, persuant to the impugned
notification deserved to be quashed as having been lapsed
and on account of inordinate and unreasonable delay in
completing the acquisition proceedings after issuance of
the final notification. Hence, I proceed to pass the
following:
ORDER
(i) Writ petition allowed.
(ii) Impugned notifications dated
03.11.2006 vide Annexure-A, dated
07.05.2007 vide Annexure-B are hereby
quashed insofar as the schedule property of
petitioners are concerned.
Sd/-
JUDGE
rv
