Karnataka High Court
Sri Sadashiva Rao vs Secretary To Urban Development on 13 January, 2023
Bench: Krishna S.Dixit
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO.14560 OF 2014 (LA-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI SADASHIVA RAO
S/O LATE BABU RAO
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
LAKSHMI LODGE
B.H. ROAD, TIPTUR - 572 201.
2. BAHUSARA KSHATRIYA DAIVA MANDALI
NO. 651/609, B.H. ROAD,
TIPTUR - 572 201
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT
SRI. N..G. MAHADEVA RAO.
3. SRI. SANJAYA CHANDRAKANTHA SHINDE
S/O CHANDRAKANTH MARUTHI SHINDE
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
NO. 54/45/1, B.H. ROAD,
TIPTUR - 572 201.
4. SRI. C. RAJANNA
S/O ARALI CHANNAVEERAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
NO.145/122/1, B.H. ROAD,
TIPTUR - 572 201.
5. SRI. V. KRISHNAN
S/O VELLAKANNAN
2
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
NO. 634/591, B.H. ROAD
TIPTUR - 572 201.
6. SRI T V RAMACHANDRA GUPTA
S/O K N VEKATACHALA SETTY
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
NO. 1114/792, B H ROAD
TIPTUR-572201
R6 IS DEAD & REPRESENTED BY HIS LRS
6a. SMT. ASHWINI GUPTA,
W/O. LATE T.V. RAMACHANDRA GUPTA
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
KEMCHAM'S VAYUPUTA JEWELLERS,
NO.7-3-289, MAIN BAZAAR,
HINDUPUR - 51501, ANDHRA PRADESH
6b. SMT. K.P.SAHANA RAJ,
W/O SRI. K.J.PANIRAJ,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
KEMCHAM'S VAYUPUTA JEWELLERS,
NO.7-3-289, MAIN BAZAAR,
HINDUPUR - 51501, ANDHRA PRADESH
7. SRI. A.N. OMPRAKASH
S/O LATE A.S. NAGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
PRABHATH COFFEE WORKS
B.H.ROAD, TIPTUR - 572 201.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. G.R.PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR P1 TO P5 & P6(a&b));
SRI. S.V.PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR P7)
3
AND:
1. SECRETARY TO URBAN DEVELOPMENT
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE - 1.
2. REGIONAL COMMISSIONER
BANGALORE REGION
SHANTHINAGAR BUS STAND
BANGALORE - 1.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
TUMKUR DISTRICT,
TUMKUR - 572 101.
4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER & LAO
TIPTUR SUB-DIVISION
TIPTUR - 572 201.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SRINIVASA GOWDA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE AWARD
NOTICES DT.20.2.2014 PASSED U/S 12(2) OF LAND
ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 BY THE ASST. COMMISSIONER & LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER, TIPTUR SUB-DIVISION, TIPTUR (ANNX-
F1 TO F8). (SL NOS.55, 43, 57, 22, 79, 47, 45 & 68); AND ETC.,
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
4
ORDER
The essential grievance of the Petitioners is against
the award notice dated 20.02.2014 issued under Section
12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in respect of the
land in question. Learned Counsel
Sri. S.V.Prakash, having argued the matter vociferously
draws attention of the Court to the Judgment dated
16.09.2011 passed by a Co-ordinate judgment of this Court
in the earlier round of litigation i.e., in W.P.Nos.28962-
28985/2009 (LA-RES), wherein specific observations have
been made that the land value has to be ascertained as it
obtained as on the date of the judgment and therefore, the
award notice not being consistent with this, is liable to be
voided.
2. Learned AGA appearing for the Official
Respondents, opposes the petition contending that the writ
remedy is not the proper remedy in matters like this; since
what is challenged is only the assessment of the
compensation in terms of the award, it is open to the
Petitioners to invoke referential jurisdiction under Section
18 of the 1894 Act and therefore, they be relegated to the
said remedy. He hastens to add that in determining the
market value of the property in question, the trial has to
take place in terms of the reference as held by the Apex
Court and that exercise ordinarily is not undertaken in writ
jurisdiction. So contending, he seeks dismissal of the Writ
Petition.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and having perused the Petition Papers, this court is
broadly in agreement with the submission of learned AGA
and therefore, declines indulgence reserving liberty to the
Petitioners to approach the Reference Court as observed
above.
To facilitate invocation of reference jurisdiction, the
period spent in prosecuting this Writ Petition shall be
discounted while computing the period of limitation for such
invocation. All contentions are kept open.
Registry is directed to return the certified copies of the
documents accompanying the petition after retaining
Photostat copies thereof in the file.
Costs made easy.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DS
