Karnataka High Court
The Commissioner vs Shri.Maliyappa Giriyappa Talawar on 14 February, 2024
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3493
RP No. 100086 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
REVIEW PETITION NO. 100086 OF 2019 (-)
BETWEEN:
THE COMMISSIONER
KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD,
CAUVERY BHAVAN,
BENGALURU-560001,
REPRESENTED BY
THE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
KHB, BAGALKOTE.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHARMILA M PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRI.MALIYAPPA GIRIYAPPA TALAWAR
AGE: 67 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: GADDANAKERI-587102,
SUJATA SUJATA
TQ and DIST: BAGALKOTE.
SUBHASH SUBHASH
PAMMAR PAMMAR
2. SHRI.BHARAMAPPA GIRIYAPPA TALAWAR
AGE: 70 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: GADDANAKERI-587102,
TQ and DIST: BAGALKOTE.
3. SMT.PARVATEVVA D/O MALIYAPPA MAVADI
AGE: 37 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: GADDANAKERI-587102,
TQ and DIST: BAGALKOTE.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3493
RP No. 100086 of 2019
4. SHRI.MALLAPPA S/O MALIYAPPA MAVADI
AGE: 46 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE and SERVICE,
R/O: GADDANAKERI-587102,
TQ and DIST: BAGALKOTE.
5. SHRI.RANAJIT VIKRAM SINGH APARADH
AGE: 48 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: GADDANAKERI-587102,
TQ and DIST: BAGALKOTE.
REP. BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
SHRI.PRAKASH S/O NARAYAN DHAYPULE
AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: SECTOR NO.5, PLOT NO.64, NAVANAGAR,
TQ and DIST: BAGALKOTE.
6. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
(LAND ACQUISITION-2),
M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.
7. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BAGALKOTE, DIST: BAGALKOTE.
8. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
BAGALKOTE, DIST: BAGALKOTE.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. V.S.KALASURMATH, HCGP FOR R6 TO R8)
THIS REVIEW PETITION UNDER ORDER XXXXVII RULE 1
READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CPC, PRAYING THAT THIS
HON'BLE COURT BE PLEASED TO REVIEW THE
ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 30.05.2017 AND RESTORE THE
WRIT PETITION NO.108257/2016 TO ITS ORIGINAL FILE TO
MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3493
RP No. 100086 of 2019
ORDER
The petitioner has sought to review the order passed by
this Court, by which, the notification dated 26.3.2010 issued
under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act published in the
official gazette on 22.04.2010 was quashed by this Court
relying on the resolution dated 8.12.2016 passed by the
Karnataka Housing Board expressing difficulty to pay
compensation to the owners of land under the provisions of
2013 Act, and resolving to form sites only in respect of the
lands of those persons, who have agreed, to share developed
land in ratio indicated in the resolution, and to forward papers
to the Revenue Department of the State for dropping up
acquisition proceedings in respect of the lands of those persons
who were not willing to share developed lands. Against an
identical order, the petitioner/Karnataka Housing Board had
filed W.A.No.100266/2021 passed in WP No.64471/2012, and
the Division Bench of this Court quashed the order passed by
the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court quashing the notification
by observing as follows:
"6. Having heard the learned Senior Counsel for the
appellant-KHB, the learned counsel Sri.K.L.Patil for the
contesting private respondents and the learned HCGP, this
Court is of the considered opinion that since the writ petitions
were disposed of recording the concession made by the learned
counsel who appeared on behalf of the KHB, the matter
requires reconsideration. The writ petitioners had raised several
grounds in the writ petitions and if the KHB seeks a decision on
the merits of the matter, then the writ petitions is to be
considered on merits. Needless to observe that the resolution
dated 08.12.2016 which is sought to be relied upon by the writ
petitioners may also be considered while disposing of the writ
petitions on merits."
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3493
2. Therefore, this review petition also requires to be
disposed of in light of the order passed by the Hon'ble Division
Bench of this Court. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
i) The review petition is allowed.
ii) The order dated 30.05.2017 passed in WP
No.108257/2016 is hereby set aside.
iii) The writ petition is restored to its file.
Sd/-
JUDGE
BKM
