The Chief Officer vs Sri B M Nagarajappa
2022 Latest Caselaw 11480 Kant

                              1



 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST 2022

                       PRESENT

            THE HON'BLE MR. ALOK ARADHE
                ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

                         AND

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

             W.A. NO.359 OF 2022 (LB-RES)
                          IN
             W.P.No.26760/2015 (LB-RES)

BETWEEN:

THE CHIEF OFFICER
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
HOLENARASIPURA
HASSAN DISTRICT
PIN-573116.
                                      ... APPELLANT
(BY MR.KESAVAREDDY M., ADV.,)

AND:

1.     SRI B.M. NAGARAJAPPA
       S/O MALLAPPA SHETTY
       AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
       R/AT KUVEMPUNAGAR
       CHANNARAYAPATNA
       HASSAN DISTRICT
       PIN CODE-573116.

2.     STATE OF KARNATAKA
       DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
       VIDHANA SOUDHA
       AMBEDKAR VEEDI
                            2



     BENGALURU-560 001
     REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
                                        ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, AGA. FOR R2)
                        ---

      THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.02.2022 PASSED IN THE W.P.
NO.26758/2015 (LB-RES) C/W W.P. NO.26760/2015 (LB-
RES). DISMISS THE SAID W.P. NO.26758/2015 (LB-RES) C/W
W.P. NO.26760/2015 (LB-RES)

     THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY,   ACTING   CHIEF  JUSTICE,  DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:

                        JUDGMENT

This intra Court appeal emanates from an order

dated 16.02.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge

by which writ petition preferred by respondent No.1

has been allowed and the appellant has been directed

to register Khatha in favour of respondent No.1 in

respect of land in question within a period of six

weeks, subject to the condition that respondent No.1

satisfies other requirements of law.

2. Facts giving rise to filing of this appeal

briefly stated are that the appellant is the Town

Municipal Council of Holenarasipura, Hassan District.

The appellant was beneficiary of acquisition of land

measuring 87.27 acres which consisted of several

survey numbers of land situated in Dhakshina Nala

Village, Holenarasipura Taluk including the land of

respondent No.1 bearing Survey No.268/3 measuring

0.004 acres. The aforesaid land was acquired by the

Government for the appellant, for forming the layout

for the weaker sections of the society.

3. A preliminary Notification under Section

4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred

to as 'the Act' for short) was issued on 20.02.1996,

whereas, declaration under Section 6(1) of the Act was

issued on 29.08.1997. However, a Notification under

Section 48(1) of the Act was issued which was subject

matter of challenge in W.P. No.32570/2000 which was

dismissed on 01.03.2002. In the proceeding before

the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the special leave petition

was disposed of in view of undertaking furnished by

the State Government that they will withdraw the

Notification.

4. Subsequently, by a Notification dated

13.09.2007, the Notification issued under Section

48(1) of the Act was withdrawn. The said Notification

was challenged by the owners of the land in W.P.

No.19088/2007, which was dismissed by an order

dated 15.10.2008. The order passed by the learned

Single Judge was set aside in an appeal by a division

bench in W.A. No.1806/2008, with a direction to the

State Government to reconsider the proceedings from

the stage prior to issuance of Notification under

Section 48(1) of the Act.

5. In pursuance of the order passed by the

division bench, the Principal Secretary, Revenue

Department, Government of Karnataka passed an

order holding that the possession of the land in

question has not been taken and therefore,

Notification issued under Section 48(1) of the Act, in

respect of the some of the lands revived. However, the

Notification under Section 48(1) of the Act did not

revive in respect of certain other lands.

6. The respondent No.1 in respect of whom

the Principal Secretary held that the Notification

issued under Section 48(1) of the Act revives, filed a

writ petition seeking a direction to the appellant -

Town Municipal Council to register Khatha in respect

of lands in question in his favour. The said writ

petition has been allowed by the learned single Judge.

In the aforesaid factual background, this appeal has

been filed.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant

submitted that the learned Single Judge erred in

directing the appellant to register the khatha in favour

of respondent No.1. It ought to have been appreciated

that the land in question was acquired and the

possession of the same was taken. Therefore, it is not

open to the State Government to take a contrary

stand.

8. We have considered the submissions made

by the learned counsel for the appellant and perused

the record. Admittedly, the State Government has

passed an order that possession in respect of some

lands has not been taken and therefore, the

Notification issued under Section 48(1) of the Act

revives. The order passed by the State Government

has not been assailed by the appellant - Town

Municipal Council and therefore, it binds the same. It

is also not in dispute that the land of respondent No.1

is covered by the subsequent order passed by the

State Government. Therefore, the learned Single

Judge has rightly directed the appellant to register the

Khatha in the name of respondent No.1, subject to the

condition that respondent No.1 satisfies other

requirements of law.

For the aforementioned reasons, we do not find

any merit in the appeal. The same fails and is hereby

dismissed.

Sd/-

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

JUDGE

SS