Karnataka High Court
Sri. Havina Chikkanna vs The State Of Karnataka on 17 June, 2022
Bench: Suraj Govindaraj
-1-
WP No. 49188 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO. 49188 OF 2014 (LA-KIADB)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. HAVINA CHIKKANNA
S/O LATE VEERAIAH
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
2. SRI. ERANNA
S/O LATE VEERAIAH
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
BOTH ARE R/O:- KEMPANADODDERI VILLAGE
GOLLARAHATTI, KORA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK
TUMKUR DISTRICT-572138
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. K R LINGARAJU, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Digitally signed by REP BY ITS SECRETARY
POORNIMA
SHIVANNA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Location: HIGH
COURT OF AND INDUSTRIES,VIKASA SOUDHA
KARNATAKA
BANGALORE-560 001
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA
DEVELOPMENT BOARD,
VASANTANARASAPURA,
INDUSTRIAL AREA 1ST PHASE
TUMKUR DISTRICT
-2-
WP No. 49188 of 2014
3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
MAHARISHI ARAVINDHA BHAVANA
NRUPATUNGHA ROAD
BANGALORE-560 001
4. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA
DEVELOPMENT BOARD
REP., BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER, 4TH FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVAN
RACECOURSE ROAD
BENGALURU-560 001
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K.R. NITHYANANDA, AGA FOR R1,
SRI. P.V. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4,
SMT. S. AISHWARYA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.P.N.RAJESHWARA,
ADVOCATE FOR IMPLEADING RESPONDENT ON I.A NO.1/2021)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION BANGALORE DTD 31.07.2006 AND
FINAL NOTIFICATION BANGALORE DTD 27.02.2007 ISSUED BY
THE R-1 VIDE ANNX-A & B IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS LAND
(DETAILED IN THE SCHEDULE HEREUNDER) ARE CONCERNED
AND ETC.,
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING-
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION, THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the
following reliefs:
a) "Issue a writ or order in the nature of CERTIORARI
by quashing the Preliminary Notification bearing
No.CI 234:SPQ 2006, Bangalore dated 31.07.2006
and Final Notification bearing No.CI 25 SPQ 2007
WP No. 49188 of 2014
Bangalore dated 27.02.2007 issued by the
Respondent No.1 vide Annexures 'A' and 'B' in so
far as the Petitioners' lands (detailed in the
Schedule hereunder) are concerned;
b) Pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble
Court deems fit under the facts and circumstances
of the case including cost of the proceedings, so
as to meet the ends of justice and equity."
2. After arguing the matter for some time,
Sri. P.V.Chandrashekar, learned counsel appearing for
the respondents-KIADB submits that in terms of the
Government Order No.CI 103 SPQ(E) 2019, dated
23.02.2021, the respondents are willing to allot an extent
of 10,781 sq.ft per acre *in lieu of the land acquired.
However, the respondents could not handover the said
land on account of the dispute between the petitioners
and the impleading applicant in I.A.No.1/2021 who
sought to come on record contending that the impleading
applicant is also owner of the property.
3. On enquiry, both the counsel for the petitioners and the
impleading applicant (Nagaraju) submit that the dispute
between them is pending in RFA.No.1335/2021.
*Corrected vide court order dt. 1/07/2022.
WP No. 49188 of 2014
4. The said submission of Sri. P.V.Chandrashekar, learned
counsel is bonafide and is supported by the submission
made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and
impleading applicant. When there is a dispute with
regard to the title of the property, the respondent-KIADB
cannot handover the entitlement under the aforesaid
Government Order of 10,781 sq.ft. per acre *in lieu of
land acquired.
5. The entitlement as regards the owner of the land under
the said Government order is not in dispute. The only
dispute being is as regards who is the owner of the land,
which would have to be resolved on the basis of the
finality being arrived at in the pending litigation between
the petitioners and the impleading applicant.
6. In view of the above, I pass the following
-:ORDER:-
a) Writ petition is disposed of.
b) Respondent No.4 is directed to reserve the
proportionate entitlement *in lieu of the acquired
land in Vasantha Narasapura Industrial Area, II
*Corrected vide court order dt. 1/07/2022.
WP No. 49188 of 2014
Phase, in terms of the Government Order dated
23.02.2021. Respondent No.4 to keep
unencumbered the said land until there is a
resolution of the dispute between the petitioner
and impleading applicant.
c) Once the dispute between the petitioners and
the impleading applicant is resolved and one of
the parties producing a final order copy of
judgment, the KIADB to allocate and transfer
the reserved land to such succeeding party.
d) The reservation to be made within a period of
four weeks' from today and informed to both the
petitioners and the impleading applicant.
e) I.A.Nos.1/2021 and 2/2021 do not survive for
consideration and stand disposed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SKS
