Karnataka High Court
Shri C Bhaskaran vs State Of Karnataka on 27 February, 2024
Author: N S Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N S Sanjay Gowda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:7998
WP No. 54368 of 2018
C/W WP No. 10506 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
WRIT PETITION NO. 54368 OF 2018 (LA-KIADB)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO. 10506 OF 2019 (LA-KIADB)
IN W.P.No.54368/2018 :
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI C BHASKARAN
S/O LATE P.K.PANICKER,
RESIDING AT NO.153, 5TH CROSS,
1ST BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU-11.
2. SHRI. C. PRAMOD
S/O SHRI C GOPALAN,
AGED 42 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.153,
Digitally
signed by
5TH CROSS, 1ST BLOCK,
KIRAN JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-11.
KUMAR R
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF 3. SHRI. C. GOPALAN
KARNATAKA S/O LATE P.K.PANICKER
RESIDING AT NO.153,
5TH CROSS, 1ST BLOCK,
JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-11.
4. M/S GOPALAN FOUNDATIONS
A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE
SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT,
AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE
AT NO.5, RICHMOND ROAD,
BENGALURU-560025
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:7998
WP No. 54368 of 2018
C/W WP No. 10506 of 2019
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT
SHRI.C.GOPALAN
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. K.N.PHANINDRA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SMT. KRUTHIKA RAGHAVAN., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT,
VIKASA SOUDHA, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDI,
BENGALURU-570001.
2. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL
AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD,
BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
EXECUTIVE MEMBER (CEO AND EM)
4TH FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVANA,
RACE COURSE ROAD,
BENGALURU-570 001.
3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION
OFFICER, KIADB (METRO)
NO.14/3, ARAVINDABAHVANA,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU-570 001.
4. BANGALORE METRO RAIL CORPORATION
LIMITED., BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
B.M.T.C. COMPLEX, 3RD FLOOR,
K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGARA,
BENGALURU-27.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MANJUNATHA RAYAPPA, AGA FOR R-1;
SRI.ASHOK N.NAYAK, ADVOACATE FOR R-2 & R-3;
SRI.S.S.NAGANAND, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI.N.N.HARISH, ADVOCATE FOR R-4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDERS AND GENERAL AWARDS
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:7998
WP No. 54368 of 2018
C/W WP No. 10506 of 2019
REFERRED/MARKED ANNEXURE-G, G1 TO Y, Y1 AND DIRECT
THE RESPONDENTS TO ADOPT THE PROVISIONS OF THE
RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND
ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT,
2013 FOR DETERMINATION OF COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT
OF AWARD, IN THE EVENT OF WRIT PETITIONS NO.38292-
38295/2017 IS DISMISSED AND LAND ACQUISITION
PROCEEDINGS HELD TO BE VALID.
IN W.P. No.10506/2019 :
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI C.BHASKARAN,
S/O LATE P.K.PANICKER,
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.153, 5TH CROSS,
1ST BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 011.
2. SRHI C.PRAMOD,
S/O SHRI C. GOPALAN, AGED 42 YEARS,
R/AT No.153, 5TH CROSS,
1ST BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 011.
3. SHRI.C.GOPALAN,
S/O LATE P.K.PANIKER, AGED 74 YEARS,
R/AT No.153, 5TH CROSS,
1ST BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 011.
4. M/S GOPALAN FOUNDATIONS,
A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE
SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT,
AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE
AT No.5, RICHMOND ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 025.
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT
SHRI C. GOPALAN.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.K.N.PHANINDRA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SMT.KRUTIKA RAGHAVAN, ADVOCATE)
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:7998
WP No. 54368 of 2018
C/W WP No. 10506 of 2019
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT,
VIKASA SOUDHA, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDI,
BENGALURU-570 001.
2. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA
DEVELOPMENT BOARD,
BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
EXECUTIVE MEMBER (CEO & EM)
4TH FLOOR, KHANIJABHAVANA,
RACE COURSE ROAD,
BENGALURU-570 001.
3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
KIADB (METRO)
No.14/3, ARAVINDABHAVANA,
BENGALURU-570 001.
4. BANGALORE METRO RAIL CORPORATION LIMITED,
BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
B M T C COMPLEX, 3RD FLOOR,
K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGARA,
BENGALURU-570 027.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MANUNATHA RAYAPPA, AGA FOR R-1;
SRI. ASHOK.N.NAYAK, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 & R-3;
SRI.S.S.NAGANAND , SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI.N.NHARISH, ADVOATE FOR R-4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
QUASH THE FOLLOWING ORDERS AND GENERAL AWARDS
REFERRED MARKED ANNEXURE-G G1 TO AF, AF1 AND DIRECT
THE RESPONDNETS TO ADOPT THE PROVISIONS OF THE
RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSAITON AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND
ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT,
2013 FOR DETERMINATIN OF COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT
OF AWARD, IN THE EVENT OF WRIT PETITION No.38292-
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:7998
WP No. 54368 of 2018
C/W WP No. 10506 of 2019
38295/2017 IS DISMISSED AND LAND ACQUISITION
PROCEEDINGS HELD TO BE VALID, ETC.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. W.P. No.54368 of 2018 is a petition filed challenging
the decision taken by the Special Land Acquisition Officer
to pass a general award.
2. W.P. No.10506 of 2019 is a petition that is filed
challenging the passing of a general award dated
14.09.2018.
3. It is the principal contention of the petitioners that
the award that is passed under the provisions of the Act 1
of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to
as, 'the 1894 Act') would be untenable and the KIADB is
required to pass an award only under the provisions of the
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
(hereinafter referred to as 'the 2013 Act')
NC: 2024:KHC:7998
4. It is also their contention that this issue has been
decided by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.
No.43206/2018 decided on 21.04.2022 and said order has
also been confirmed by the Division Bench in W.A.
No.890/2022.
5. It is, however, admitted by both the parties that the
judgment passed by the Division Bench has been
challenged by the beneficiary i.e., Bangalore Metro
Railway Corporation Limited (BMRCL) in S.L.P. Diary
No.49540/2023 converted to S.L.P. (Civil) No.3798/2024
and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in said Special Leave
Petition has after declining the prayer for stay has stated
that the Prescribed Authority-cum-Collector under the
2013 Act should continue with the proceedings to assess
the compensation in accordance with the 2013 Act.
6. It is also observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
that if an award has already been passed in favour of the
respondents therein under the 2013 Act, the enhanced
amount of compensation should be deposited by the
NC: 2024:KHC:7998
beneficiary - BMRCL in the Reference Court and the same
should not be disbursed until further orders.
7. In view of the above, it is clear that the position of
law, as regards the passing of an award under the 2013
Act, has been decided by Single Bench and also confirmed
by the Division Bench to the effect that the award has to
be passed under the 2013 Act. In that view of the matter,
the impugned awards which have been admittedly passed
under the 1894 Act cannot be sustained, and they are
quashed.
8. However, since the matter is pending adjudication
before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it would be appropriate
to direct the Prescribed Authority to initiate proceedings to
pass a fresh award in terms of the 2013 Act and thereafter
deposit the enhanced amount of compensation with the
Reference Court.
9. In the event the Hon'ble Supreme Court reverses the
decision of the Division Bench and holds that the award
would have to be passed under the 1894 Act, it is needless
NC: 2024:KHC:7998
to state that the beneficiary would be entitled to withdraw
the amount that would have been deposited pursuant to
the award that is to be passed under the 2013 Act, and
therefore, no prejudice as such would be caused to the
beneficiary.
10. Consequently, the general award passed in respect of
the petitioners' land is quashed and a direction is issued to
the Prescribed Authority to pass an award under the
provisions of the 2013 Act and if it is found that the
compensation was required to be enhanced, the enhanced
compensation shall be deposited before the Reference
Court.
11. It is also argued that the KIADB, while passing the
general award, has deducted tax at source and remitted
the matter to the Income Tax Department. It is also
contended that the learned Single Judge of this Court had
held in W.P. No.43206/2018 that the Income Tax
Department had no right to insist on deduction at source
and this order was actually challenged by the Income Tax
NC: 2024:KHC:7998
Department in W.A. No.1070/2022 which was tagged
along with other Writ Appeals filed by the beneficiary and
KIADB and said Writ Appeals are also dismissed. It is
stated that the Income Tax Department has not
challenged said order of the Division Bench.
12. In that view of the matter, the KIADB would also
have to pay the amount that has been deducted as tax to
the petitioners. It would be, however, open to the KIADB
to seek refund of the tax from the Income Tax
Department, since the Income Tax Department has
accepted the order of the Division Bench holding that it
cannot insist on tax being deducted at source in respect of
the compensation awarded under the provisions of the
1894 Act. Writ Petitions are, accordingly, disposed of.
13. The amounts awarded under the general awards that
has been passed under the 1894 Act, which is stated to
have been deposited by the KIADB before the Reference
Court shall be disbursed in accordance with law to the
persons, who are entitled to claim the said amount.
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:7998
14. The Reference Court shall invest the enhanced
compensation that the fresh award to be passed under the
2013 Act, in a Fixed Deposit in any Scheduled or
Nationalised Bank and the disbursal would be dependant
on the aforementioned decision of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the pending Special Leave Petition.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HNM
