[Cites 29, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Sri Mogannagowda vs State Of Karnataka on 15 December, 2025
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
1
Reserved on : 16.09.2025
Pronounced on : 15.12.2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION No.19828 OF 2024(LA - RES)
C/W
WRIT PETITION No.14082 OF 2024(LA - RES)
IN WRIT PETITION No.19828 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
1 . SRI MOGANNAGOWDA
S/O TIMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS
PROFESSION AGRICULTURIST
R/O DODDA MEDURU VILLAGE,
CHIKKA MEDURU POST,
BELURU TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115.
2 . SRI GANGESH D.H.,
S/O LATE HANUMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
PROFESSION AGRICULTURIST
R/O DODDA MEDURU VILLAGE,
CHIKKA MEDURU POST,
BELURU TALUK
2
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115
REPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDER
SRI SACHIN D.G.,
S/O GANGESH D.H.,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
PROFESSION BUSINESSMAN
R/O DODDA MEDURU VILLAGE,
CHIKKA MEDURU POST,
BELURU TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115.
3 . SRI HONNEGOWDA
S/O LATE CHANNEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
PROFESSION AGRICULTURIST
R/O DODDA MEDURU VILLAGE,
CHIKKA MEDURU POST,
BELURU TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115.
4 . SMT.HUCCHAMMA
W/O LATE D.T.HIREGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
PROFESSION AGRICULTURIST
R/O DODDA MEDURU VILLAGE,
CHIKKA MEDURU POST,
BELURU TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115
REPRESENTED BY GPA HOLDER
SRI D.E.PADMEGOWDA
S/O LATE HIRIGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
PROFESSION AGRICULTURIST
R/O DODDA MEDURU VILLAGE,
CHIKKA MEDURU POST,
BELURU TALUK
3
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115.
5 . SRI DYAVEGOWDA
S/O LATE HANUMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
R/O DODDA MEDURU VILLAGE,
CHIKKA MEDURU POST,
BELURU TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115
REPRESENTED BY GPA HOLDER
SRI SHREENIDHI D.D.,
S/O DYAVEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
ENGINEER BY PROFESSION
R/O NO.1366, 5TH MAIN, "E" BLOCK,
2ND STAGE, RAJAJINAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 010.
6 . SRI SHANTHEGOWDA
S/O LATE HANUMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
R/O DODDA MEDURU VILLAGE,
CHIKKA MEDURU POST,
BELURU TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115
REPRESENTED BY GPA HOLDER
SRI KARTHIK D.S.,
S/O SRI SHANTHEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
PROFESSION AGRICULTURIST
R/O DODDA MEDURU VILLAGE,
CHIKKA MEDURU POST,
BELURU TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI KARTHIK S.TAYUR, ADVOCATE)
4
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
M.S.BUILDING, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
HASSAN DISTRICT
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OFFICE
B.M. ROAD, HASSAN
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201.
3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
HEMAVATHI RESERVOIR
RAILWAY PROJECT HASSAN
OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OFFICE
B.M.ROAD, HASSAN
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201.
4. THE TAHASILDAR
BELUR TALUK
BELURU, HASSAN DISTRICT
PH: 08177 222234
EMAIL: [email protected]
PIN - 573 115.
5. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COMMISSIONER AND
EX-OFFICIO
RESETTLEMENT OFFICER
HASSAN DISTRICT
HASSAN - 573 201.
6. UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY GENERAL MANAGER
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY
5
RAIL SOUDHA, GADAG ROAD
HUBBALLI - 580 020.
7. CHIEF ENGINEER/CONSTRUCTION
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY
NO.18, MILLERS ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 046.
8. DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER/CONSTRUCTION
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY
NO.18, MILLERS ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 046.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-5;
SRI M.N.KUMAR, CGSPC FOR R-6 TO R-8)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO 1. QUASH THE NOTICE
DATED 30.01.2023 UNDER SECTION 21(1) AND (2) OF THE RIGHT
TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND
ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2014
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEARING NO.CKM-SKP/9/2018-
19 (AT ANNEXURES-"T1" TO "T6" RESPECTIVELY), AND DIRECT
THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO PROCEED AFRESH STRICTLY IN
ACCORDANCE WITH LAW; 2. QUASHING THE PRELIMINARY
NOTIFICATION BEARING ¨sÀÆ.¸Áé. 851/2016-17 DATED 30-01-2019 AT
ANNEXURE-B ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2, AS HAVING
BECOME RESCINDED BY OPERATION OF SECTION 19(7) OF THE
RFCTLARR ACT, 2013; 3.QUASHING THE NOTIFICATION UNDER
SECTION 19(1) AND (2) RFCTLARR ACT BEARING ¸ÀA.17 JPÀÆåºÉZï
2020(E) DATED 18.01.2023 AT ANNEXURE-E ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THE RESCINDING OF THE
PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION; 4. QUASHING THE AWARD NOTICE
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 30.05.2023 BEARING
NO.CKM-SKP/10/2018-19 (ANNEXURE H1-H11) AND
RD
ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE 3 RESPONDENT DATED
6
09.08.2023 BEARING NO. ¨sÀÆ.¸Áé. »A§gÀºÀ / 2023-24 / 1418
(ANNEXURE-L1), NO. ¨sÀÆ.¸Áé. »A§gÀºÀ / 2023-24 / 1413
(ANNEXURE-L2) NO. ¨sÀÆ.¸Áé. »A§gÀºÀ / 2023-24 / 1415
(ANNEXURE-L3) NO. ¨sÀÆ.¸Áé. »A§gÀºÀ / 2023-24 / 1414
(ANNEXURE-L4) NO. ¨sÀÆ.¸Áé. »A§gÀºÀ / 2023-24 / 1417
(ANNEXURE-L5) AND THE ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT DATED 13.11.2023 BEARING ¨sÀÆ.¸Áé. »A§gÀºÀ / 2023-24
(ANNEXURE -M1), ¨sÀÆ.¸Áé. »A§gÀºÀ / 2023-24 / 2534 (ANNEXURE-M2),
¨sÀÆ.¸Áé. »A§gÀºÀ / 2023-24 / 2535 (ANNEXURE-M3), 2023-24/2527
(ANNEXURE-M4) AND 2023-24(ANNEXURE-M5) RESPECTIVELY.
5. ISSUE A WRIT ORDER PROHIBITING THE RESPONDENTS FROM
TAKING POSSESSION OF THE PETITIONERS LAND WITHOUT
FULFILLING THEIR STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS UNDER LAW IN
PASSING AN AWARD NOTICE AND REHABILITATION AND
RESETTLEMENT AWARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RIGHT TO
FAIR COMPENSATION AND REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT
ACT,2013.
IN WRIT PETITION No.14082 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
DC PUTTASWAMIGOWDA
S/O CHANNEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS
PROFESSION AGRICULTURIST,
R/O DODDA MEDURU VILLAGE,
CHIKKA MEDURU POST,
BELURU TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI KARTHIK S.TAYUR, ADVOCATE)
7
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
M S BUILDING, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
HASSAN DISTRICT
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OFFICE
B.M.ROAD, HASSAN
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201.
3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
HEMAWATHI RESERVOIR / RAILWAY PROJECT
HASSAN
OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OFFICE
B.M.ROAD, HASSAN
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201.
4. THE TAHASILDAR
BELUR TALUK
BELURU HASSAN DISTRICT
PH 08177 222234
EMAIL [email protected]
PIN-573115
5. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
COMMISSIOENR AND EX - OFFICIO
RESETTLEMENT OFFICER
HASSAN DISTRICT
HASSAN - 573 201.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP)
8
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO 1. QUASHING THE NOTICE
DATED 30.01.2023 UNDER SECTION 21(1) AND (2) OF THE RIGHT
TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND
ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2014
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEARING NO.CKM-SKP/9/2018-
19 (AT ANNEXURE - "Petition"), AND DIRECT THE 3RD RESPONDENT
TO PROCEED AFRESH STRICTLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 2.
AWARD NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED
30.05.2023 BEARING NO.CKM-SKP/10/2018-19(ANNEXURE - G),
AND THE ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED
09.08.2023 BEARING NO. gÉʯÉé:¨sÀÆ.¸Áé./»A§gÀº/2023-24/1419À (ANNEXURE -
K) RESPECTIVELY; 3. ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING
THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO CONDUCT AN INQUIRY AS REQUIRED BY
LAW WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF SECTIONS, 16, 26, 27, 28 AND
31 RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND REHABILITATION AND
RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013, PASSING AN AWARD NOTICE IN
CONFORMITY WITH THE LAW ALONGSIDE A REHABILITATION AND
RESETTLEMENT AWARD AS REQUIRED UNDER LAW; 4. ISSUE A
WRIT ORDER PROHIBITING THE RESPONDENTS FROM TAKING
POSSESSION OF THE PETITIONER'S LAND WITHOUT FULFILLING
THEIR STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS UNDER LAW IN PASSING AN
AWARD NOTICE AND REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT
AWARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RIGHT TO FAIR
COMPENSATION AND REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT,
2013.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 16.09.2025, COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
9
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CAV ORDER
The petitioners, in both these cases, call in question
acquisition proceedings, pursuant to the final notification issued by
the State seeking to acquire the lands of the petitioners for the
purpose of Chikkamagaluru-Sakaleshpura New Broad Gauge
Railway Project ('the Project' for short).
2. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows: -
2.1. The petitioners are owners of certain landed properties
coming within the project. On 30-01-2019 the 2nd respondent/
Deputy Commissioner issues a preliminary notification under
Section 11(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency
in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short). The 3rd
respondent/Special Land Acquisition Officer issues notices to the
petitioners in terms of gazette notification dated 28-02-2019 which
was issued after issuance of preliminary notification. In terms of
notices so issued, the petitioners were to submit their objections on
10
or before 08-08-2019 and an opportunity of hearing was to be
granted to the petitioners on 21-08-2019 in terms of the
notification. The petitioners in Writ Petition No.19828 of 2024
communicate to the respondents seeking adequate compensation
for the lands where railway tracks of the project were to be laid.
This was in reply to the notice so issued. When things stood thus,
the Government then issued an endorsement holding that the
period of issuing and publishing the final notification which was to
expire on 26-08-2022 would be extended up to 27-09-2023.
2.2. In the interregnum, the petitioners file objections on
14-02-2023 and 13-02-2023, objecting to the omission of 50 Silver
trees and 140 Coffee plants in W.P.No.19828 of 2024 and 350 silver
trees in W.P.No.14082 of 2024 on the acquired land, in the award
notice so issued. The petitioners then represent on 20-07-2023
opposing the award notice comprehensively holding that it was
illegal on the part of the 3rd respondent in deciding the
compensation that is to be paid to these petitioners. When the
representations go unheeded, the petitioners are now at the doors
of this Court in the subject petition, calling in question the
11
notification so issued, seeking to acquire the lands of these
petitioners, inter alia, on the score that it is in violation of the
mandate of the Act.
3. Heard Sri Karthik S.Tayur, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioners and Sri Spoorthy Hegde N, learned High Court
Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 5 in both the
petitions and Sri M.N.Kumar, learned Central Government Senior
Panel Counsel appearing for respondents 6 to 8 in Writ Petition
No.19828 of 2024.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits
that what is challenged in the subject petitions is twin fold. The
learned counsel would take this Court through the provisions of the
Act, with particular reference to sub-section (7) of Section 19,
which mandates that acquisition should be completed within one
year from the date of issuance of preliminary notification. The other
fold of illegality, the learned counsel submits is, that Section 21(2)
of the Act mandates personal hearing to be granted to these land
owners, which admittedly in the case had not happened and,
12
therefore, the acquisition proceedings are bad in law. He would
seek to place reliance on certain judgments of coordinate benches
of this Court and other High Court judgments, all of which would
bear consideration qua their relevance in the course of the order.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader
would vehemently refute the submissions in contending that the
petitioners through their Advocates have filed objections before the
Deputy Commissioner on receipt of notices from the hands of the
Special Land Acquisition Officer and there is a notification issued
extending the time limit of conclusion of acquisition proceedings in
terms of Section 19 of the Act itself. Therefore, both the provisions
upon which the learned counsel for the petitioners seeks to place
reliance have been complied with in the case at hand. He would
submit that petitions be dismissed as wanting in merit.
6. The learned Central Government Senior Panel Counsel
Sri M.N. Kumar appearing for the Railways would toe the lines of
the learned High Court Government Pleader. He would further
submit that the project is now stifled mid-stream and it has to be
13
completed as early as possible, as it is the project in public interest.
He would also seek dismissal of the petitions.
7. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions
made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the
material on record.
8. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The issue
revolves round interpretation of two provisions of the Act. The
petitioners claim to be owners of the properties which become the
subject matter of acquisition for the purpose as indicated
hereinabove. The preliminary notification under Section 11(1) of
the Act is issued on 30-01-2019. 60 days' time is granted for
objections, if any, to the preliminary notification. On 06-06-2019
the Special Land Acquisition Officer issues notices to the petitioners
qua the said acquisition proceedings as afore-indicated. The
purpose of issuance of notice is as follows:
"¸ÀASÉå: CKM-SKP 9/2018-19 06-06-2019
ಈ ೋ ೕ ೆ ಅನುಬಂ ರುವ ಅನುಸೂ ಯ ಷಪ ರುವ ೕಣ ವನು !ಾಸನ
#$ೆಯ &ೇಲೂರು (ಾಲೂ)ನ ಕಸ&ಾ !ೋಬ+ಯ ,ೊಡ./ೕದೂರು ಾ1ಮದ ರುವ ಭೂ4ಯು
14
5ಾವ ಜ ಕ ಉ,ೆ8ೕಶ:ಾ;< ಅಂದ=ೆ ಕ;ಮಗಳ@ರು-ಸಕ$ೇಶಪAರ !ೊಸ &ಾ1B ೇC =ೈಲು EಾUÀð
Fೕಜ ೆಯ ಉ,ೆ8ೕಶ:ಾ;< ಅಗತHIಾ<,ೆ ಎಂದು 28-02-2019 K ಾಂಕದ =ಾಜH ಪತ1ದ 6-ಎ ೇ
Lಾಗದ 2985 Mಂದ 2990 ರ ವರ<ನ ಪAಟಗಳ ಸ:ಾ ರವA ಪ1ಕ ರುವ 11(1) Oಾ1ಥ4ಕ
ಅ ಸೂಚ ೆಯ ಅನು5ಾರIಾ< ಈ ಮೂಲಕ ೋ ೕ ೕಡ$ಾ<,ೆ. R(ಾಸ)ಯುಳS ವH)ಗಳT ಸದM
ಭೂ5ಾU ೕನ:ೆ; ಸಂಬಂ ದಂ(ೆ ತಮV ಆXೇಪYೆಗZೇ ಾದರು ಇದ8=ೆ K ಾಂಕ 8-08-2019 ರಂದು
ಅಥIಾ ಅದ:ೆ; \ದಲು ]ೇಷ ಭೂ5ಾU ೕ ಾ :ಾMಗಳT, !ೇEಾವ^ ಜ$ಾಶಯ Fೕಜ ೆ, !ಾಸನ
ಇವM ೆ ಸ ಸುವಂ(ೆ :ೋರ$ಾ<,ೆ.
ಆXೇಪYೆಗಳ ಸUರೂಪವನು ಅಥIಾ ಭೂ4ಯ ನ R(ಾಸ)ಯ ಸUರೂಪವನು ಸ_ಷ Iಾ<
ªÀj¸ÀzÉÀ ಆXೇಪYಾ ವರYಾ ಪ ಯನು 5ಾ=ಾಸಗ`ಾ< ^ರಸ;Mಸ$ಾUÀÄವAದು.
ಗ ತ ಅವ ಯ Uೕಕೃ^bಾದ ಆXೇಪYೆಗಳನು ]ೇಷ ಭೂ5ಾU ೕ ಾ ಕMಗಳT,
!ೇEಾವ^ ಜ$ಾಶಯ Fೕಜ ೆ, !ಾಸನ ಇವರ ಕcೇMಯ K ಾಂಕ 21-08-2019 ರಂಮ dಾರYೆ
ನeೆಸ$ಾಗುವAದು."
It calls for objections from all the stake holders or the land owners
and also indicated that on 21-08-2019 inquiry or consideration of
objections would take place. The last date for filing of objections
was 08-08-2019. The petitioners, though did not object to the
acquisition, gave a representation which reads as follows:
" UÉ,
]ೇಷ ಭೂ5ಾU ೕ ಾ :ಾMಯವರ :ಾbಾ ಲಯ
#$ಾ :ಾMಗಳ ಕಟ ಡ, !ಾಸನ
EAzÁ:-
\ಗಣh ೌಡ s/o ^/j ೌಡ
,ೊಡ./ೕದೂರು, ಕ;/ೕದೂರು k.
15
ಕಸ&ಾ (!ೊ), &ೇಲೂರು (ಾ||
!ಾಸನ #$ೆ
ಷಯ: =ೈಲು !ಾದು !ೋಗುವ ಜ4ೕ ೆ ಪM!ಾರ ಪeೆಯುವ ಬ ೆm
EಾನH=ೇ,
ನಮV ಜ4ೕ ನ ಎರಡು ಕeೆ =ೈಲು ,ಾM Eಾಡಲು ಕಲು !ಾಕ$ಾ<ದು8 ಒಂದು ಕeೆ
ಜ4ೕ ೆ ಅಂದ=ೆ ಸIೆ ನಂಬo 77/1 :ೆ; ೋ ೕಸು ಕ+ ರು(ಾ=ೆ, ಇ ೊ ಂದು ಜ4ೕ ನ ಅಂದ=ೆ
ಸIೆ ನಂಬo 79/4 ರ !ಾದು !ೋ<ರುವ =ೈಲು ,ಾM ೆ bಾವA,ೇ ೋ ೕಸು :ೊ ರುವAKಲ. ಆ
ಜ4ೕ ನ ಯೂ ಕಲು !ಾ) =ೈಲು ,ಾM ಗುರು^ಸ$ಾ<,ೆ. ದಯ ಟು ನಮV ಎರಡು ಜ4ೕನುಗ+ಗೂ
ಅಂದ=ೆ ಸIೆ ನಂ. 77/1 ಮತು 79/4ರ ರುವ 0.28 ಗುಂ`ೆಗ+ಗೂ ಪM!ಾರ :ೊಡ&ೇ:ೆಂದು ಮV
ನಂ^ಸು(ೇ ೆ.
K ಾಂಕ:- 28/06/2019 EAw
ಸpಳ:- !ಾಸನ ¸À»/-
(\ಗಣh ೌಡ)"
All these culminated in issuance of a final notification and
determination of compensation and issuance of award notices. One
of the award notices so issued on 30-05-2023 under Section 37(2)
of the Act is as follows:
"ಅIಾB
ಅIಾB ೋ ೕ
"ಭೂ5ಾU ೕನ ಪ1)1tಯ Oಾರದಶ ಕ(ೆ,
ಕ(ೆ ಸೂPÀÛ ಪM!ಾರದ ಹಕು;,
ಹಕು; ಪAನವ ಸ^ ಮತು ಪAನ
o Eಾ ಣ :ಾt8 2013" ಕಲಂ 37(2) ರಂ(ೆ
&ೇಲೂರು (ಾಲೂಕು, ಕಸ&ಾ !ೋಬ+, ,ೊಡ./ೕದೂರು ಾ1ಮದ IಾಸIಾ<ರುವ
\ಗಣh ೌಡ vw ^/j ೌಡ ಇವM ೆ ^+ಯಪ ಸುವA,ೇ ೆಂದ=ೆ ಮV &ಾ§ÄÛ ಕ;ಮಗಳ@ರು-
ಸಕ$ೇಶಪAರ !ೊಸ &ಾ1B ೇC =ೈ$ೆU Fೕಜ ೆಯ :ಾಮ ಾM ಉ,ೆ8ೕಶ:ೆ; ಭೂ5ಾU ೕನ
ಪ :ೊಂ ರುವA,ಾ< Oಾ1,ೇxಕ ಆಯುಕರು, /ೖಸೂರು Lಾಗ, /ೖಸೂರು ಇವರ ಅ ಕೃತ yಾಪ ಾ
ಸಂzೆH: ಎ{.ಎ.ಕೂH(2) .ಆo:11/2023-24 K ಾಂಕ: 23/05/2023 ರಂದು ಪM!ಾರದ ಅIಾB
16
ಅನು\ದ ೆbಾ<ರುತ,ೆ ಆದುದMಂದ ೕವA ಈ ಸಂಬಂಧIಾ< ಈ :ೆಳಕಂಡ ,ಾಖ$ೆಗZೆ@ ಂK ೆ ಈ
ಕcೇM ೆ !ಾಜ=ಾ< ಅIಾB ಪM!ಾರ ಪeೆಯತಕ;ದು8."
In reply to the award notices, the petitioners file their
representations/objections. The objections resulted in an
endorsement. The endorsement is common to both the petitioners
in both these petitions. One such endorsement dated 09-08-2023
reads as follows:
Rಂಬರಹ::
Rಂಬರಹ
"::Rಂಬರಹ
ಷಯ: ಕ;ಮಗಳ@ರು-&ೇಲೂರು-ಸಕ$ೇಶಪAರ =ೈ$ೆU Fೕಜ ೆ :ಾಮ ಾM
ಉ,ೆ8ೕಶ:ಾ;< ಜ4ೕನನ ಭೂ 5ಾU ೕನ:ೆ; ಒಳ ಪ ರುವ ಬ ೆm
ಉ$ೇಖ : x1ೕ \ಗಣh ೌಡ vw ^/j ೌಡ, ,ೊಡ./ೕದೂರು, ಕಸ&ಾ !ೊಬ+.
&ೇಲೂರು (ಾಲೂಕು ಇವರ ಅ# K ಾಂಕ: 20/07/2023
*****
x1ೕ \ಗಣh ೌಡ vw ^/j ೌಡ, ,ೊಡ./ೕದೂರು, ಕಸ&ಾ !ೊಬ+, &ೇಲೂರು (ಾಲೂಕು
ಆದ ೕವA ನನ ಕುಟುಂಬ:ೆ; 5ೇMದ ಸIೆ ನಂಬo 77 ಮತು 79 ರ ಭೂ5ಾU ೕನIಾದ ಜ4ೕ ನ
ಒಟು ೕಣ 0-16 ಗುಂ`ೆ ಖು¶Ì, :ಾ~, :ಾಳT /ಣಸು, ನು ೆm, (ೆಂಗು, ಅಂ`ಾUಳ ಮತು ಲUರ ಮರ
ಜ4ೕನನು ಮತು =ಾ< ಶುಂ•, €ೋಳ &ೆZೆ &ೆZೆಗಳನು &ೆZೆಯು^ದ8 ಫಲವ(ಾದ ಜ4ೕನನು !ಾಗೂ
&ೇಲೂM ಂದ 2 )$ೋ4ಟo ಅಂತರದ ರುವ IೇಶನIಾ< ಪMವತ ೆ ಆಗುವ &ೆ$ೆ &ಾಳTವ
ಜ4ೕನನು =ೈ$ೆU Fೕಜ ೆ ಉ,ೆ8ೕಶ:ಾ;< ನಮV ಒ‚_ ೆ ಇಲ,ೆ ಭೂ 5ಾU ೕನ ಪ :ೊಳSಲು :ಾನೂನು
ಸಮVತವಲದ, ಅIೈyಾ ಕ ಅIಾB ೕ ರುವAದನು ರದು8 ಪ ಸುವಂ(ೆ :ೋM ಮನ .
ನನ &ಾ§ÄÛ ಜ4ೕನನು ಸದM ಕ;ಮಗಳ@ರು-ಸಕ$ೇಶಪAರ !ೊಸ &ಾ1B ೇC =ೈ$ೆU
Fೕಜ ೆಯ :ಾಮ ಾM ಉ,ೆ8ೕಶ:ೆ; ಭೂ5ಾU ೕನ ಪ :ೊಂಡ ಅ ಕೃತ yಾಪನ ಸಂzೆH:
ಎ{.ಎ.ಕೂH(2) .ಆo.11/2023-24 ರಂ(ೆ ನನ ೆ ಅIಾB ೋ ಸನು K ಾಂಕ: 15/06/2023
ರಂದು :ೊಟ ಅIಾB ಪM!ಾರದ ಹಣ ರೂ. 3,91,574/- ಗಳನು 5ಾEಾನH ಐ ^‚ ನ ಮೂಲಕ
17
Iೈyಾ ಕವಲದ !ಾಗೂ ನನ ೆ ಒ‚_ ೆ ಇಲದ ಆ,ೇಶವನು Eಾ ರು^ೕM. ನನ ೆ 5ೇMದ ಫಲವ(ಾದ
ಜ4ೕನು &ೆ$ೆ &ಾಳTವ ಜ4ೕ ಾ<ದು8 ಸದM ಇದರ ಶುಂ•, €ೋಳ, ಇದು8 ಸದM ಜ4ೕ ೆ !ಾಗೂ
&ೆZೆ ೆ ಸMbಾದ Eಾರುಕ`ೆ EೌಲHವನು ಗKಪ ರುವAKಲ. ಸದM ಆ,ೇಶವA ಸM ಇಲದ :ಾರಣ
ಾನು ಅIಾB , ಅ,ೇಶವನು ಪ1^ಭ ರು(ೇ ೆ. !ಾಗೂ !ಾ ನಮV &ೇಲೂರು ನಗರ:ೆ;
ಸಂಬಂ ದಂ(ೆ Eಾರುಕ`ೆ &ೆ$ೆ ಗK Eಾಡ,ೆ ನನ ಾ1ಮದ 8 ವಷ ಗಳ RಂKನ ಎ .ಆo.
EೌಲHವನು ಜ4ೕ ೆ ಗKಪ ರುವ ಪM!ಾರದ ಹಣ ಬಹಳ ಕ /bಾ<ದು8 !ಾ &ೇಲೂರು
ವಲಯದ Eಾರುಕ`ೆ &ೆ$ೆ ೆ ಅನುಗುಣIಾ<ರುವAKಲ.
/ೕಲ;ಂಡ ನನ ಜ4ೕನನು ನನ ಒ‚_ ೆ ಪeೆದು ವಶಪ :ೊಳS,ೆ ಮV ಇdೆ„ ೆ ತಕ;ಂ(ೆ ಭೂ
5ಾU ೕನ ಪ :ೊಂ ರು^ೕರ ನನ ಾ1ಮದ ಎ$ಾರು ಸಹ ಕೃ... ಮತು !ೈನು ಾM:ೆಯ ೆ ೕ
ಅವಲಂv ದು8, !ಾಗೂ ಶUಪ1 ದ† ಚನ :ೇಶವ ,ೇIಾಲಯ ದು8 ಪ1Iಾ (ಾಣIಾ<ದು8, ಸದM
,ೇIಾಲಯKಂದ :ೆವಲ 2 )$ೋ4ಟo ಅಂತರದ ನಮV ಜ4ೕನುಗಳT ಇದು8 ಇ^ೕ ೆ
Iಾ‡ಜHನಗರIಾ< ಪMವತ ೆ ೊಳTS^ದು8 ಇಂತಹ ಸಂದಭ ದ ನಮV ಬದು) ೆ ಆˆಾರIಾ<ದ8 ನಮV
ಜ4ೕ ೆ ಸMbಾದ &ೆ$ೆ ಗ ಪ ,ೆ ನಮV ಒ‚_ ೆ ಪeೆಯ,ೆ ಇಷು ವಷ ಗ+ಂದ ಕಷ ಪಟು
ಕೃ...ಯ ೆ ೕ ಅವಲಂv #ೕವನ 5ಾ< :ೊಂಡು ಾವAಗಳT ಬಂKದು8, ಜ4ೕ ನ Eಾ=ಾಟ Eಾಡುವ
ಪ1/ಯIೇ ಒದ< ಬಂKರುವAKಲ. ನಮV ಫಲವ(ಾದ ಜ4ೕ ೆ Eಾರುಕ`ೆ &ೆ$ೆಯನೂ ಸಹ ಸMbಾ<
(ೆ ೆದು:ೊಳS,ೆ ನನ ೆ ತುಂಬ$ಾರದ ನಷ ಗಳನು ಂಟು Eಾ ರು^ೕರ. ನನ ಜ4ೕನನು
ವಶಪ :ೊಳSಲು Eಾ ರುವ ಅIಾB ಜ4ೕ ನ Oೈ) ಉ+ದ ೕಣ ಜ4ೕನು ಸಹ ವHವ5ಾಯ /
Iೇಶನ Eಾಡಲು 5ಾಧH ರುವAKಲ. :ಾರಣ ಆ ಜ4ೕ ನ ಪಕ;ದ =ೈ$ೆU &ಾ1B ೇC
!ೋ<ರುವAದMಂದ Iೇಶನ 4 ¹zÀgÀÆ ಸಹ bಾರೂ :ೊಳSಲು ಮುಂ,ೆ ಬರುವAKಲ. !ಾಗೂ
ಜ4ೕ ನ :ೆಲಸ :ಾಯ Eಾಡಲು !ಾಗೂ ಆ ಜ4ೕ ೆ ೕMನ 5ೌಲಭH ಒದ<ಲಸು (ೊಂದ=ೆ
ಉಂ`ಾ< !ಾಗೂ ಉ+ದ ಅಲ_ ಸUಲ_ ಜ4ೕ ನ ಕೃ... Eಾಡಲು FೕಗHIಾಗ,ೆ ನನ ೆ ತುಂಬ$ಾರದ
ನಷ ಉಂ`ಾ<ರುತ,ೆ.
ನನ ಜ4ೕನು &ೇಲೂರು (ಾಲೂಕು :ೇಂದ1Kಂದ 3 )ೕ$ೋ4ಟo !ಾಗೂ &ೇಲೂರು
ಮೂ ೆ=ೆ gÀ¸ÉÛUÉ 1.5 )$ೋ4ಟo ಅಂತರದ &ೇಲೂM ಂದ ಕ;ಮಗಳ@ರು #$ಾ !ೆ,ಾ8M ಪಕ;ದ
ಜ4ೕ ಾ<ರುತ,ೆ. PÉÊUÁjPÉ ºÁUÀÆ ]ೈ‰‡ಕIಾ<, Iೈyಾ ಕIಾ<, !ಾಗೂ &ೇಲೂರು ನಗರದ
Iಾ‡€ೊHೕದHಮ:ೆ; ಹ^ರIಾ<ರುವ !ಾಗೂ IೇಶನಗZಾ< Eಾ=ಾಟ Eಾಡುವ ಜ4ೕ ಾ<ದು8 ಪ1^
IೇಶನವA ಸುEಾರು 10 ಲ‰ ರೂಗ+ ೆ IಾHOಾರ DUÀĪÀ ಜ4ೕನು ಆ<ರುತ,ೆ.
ಸದM ನನ ಾ1ಮದ 200 ಮ ೆಗ+ದು8 ಆ 200 ಮ ೆಗಳT ಸಹ =ೈತ ಕುಟುಂಬ:ೆ; 5ೇMದು8
ನಮV ªÀÄÆ® ಕಸುಬು ಕೃ... ಮತು !ೈನು ಾM:ೆ ಆ<ದು8, ನಮV ಪŠವ ಜರ :ಾಲKಂದಲೂ ಾIೆಲರೂ
ಸಹ ವHವ5ಾಯªÀ£Éßà ಅವಲಂv #ೕವನ ನeೆಸು^ದು8, ಾವA &ೆZೆದ &ೆZೆಗಳ ಉತಮIಾ<ರುವ
18
ದವಸ, ˆಾನH, ಹಣುh, ತರ:ಾM ºÀÆ, (ೆಂಗು, ಅ :ೆ, =ಾ<, €ೋಳ, ಹ^, ಶುಂ• ಇವAಗಳನು &ೆZೆದು
ಅವAಗಳನು ನಗರದ ಅಂಗ ಗ+ ೆ ಮ=ಾಟ ªÀiÁr ಅ+ದು+ದ ದವಸ ˆಾನHಗಳನು ಇಟು :ೊಂಡು
!ೇ ೋ #ೕವನ ನeೆಸು^ದು8 ಅದಕೂ; ಸಹ (ಾವA ಅIೈyಾ ಕªÁzÀ =ೈ$ೆU Fೕಜ ೆ Eಾ ಾವA
&ೆZೆದು ^ನು ವ ಅನ :ೆ; ಕಲು !ಾ)ದು8, !ಾಗೂ ೕವA 4 ಸು^ರುವ ಅIೈyಾಕ :ಾಮ ಾM ಪMYಾಮ
ಪMಸರದ ನ Oಾ1‡, ಪ‹ಗ+ ೆ, ದನ ಕರುಗ+ ೆ, ನ ಲು, ಆ ೆ, ಮುಂ(ಾದ ವನH#ೕ«UÀ¼À ಸಂತ^ ೆ
ಚುH^ ಉಂಟುEಾ ದು8 ನನ ಮ ೆಯ ಅಕ; ಪಕ; =ೈ$ೆU &ಾ1B ೇC Eಾಡಲು !ೋದ ರ5ೆ ಇಲದ !ಾ ೆ
Eಾ ನನ ಮತು ನನ ಕುಟುಂಬದ #ೕವನ:ೆ; (ೊಂದ=ೆ ಉಂಟು Eಾ vೕK ೆ ಬರುವ ಪM p^ ೆ ತಂzÀÄ
ರು^ೕM.
(ಾವA ಈ Fೕಜ ೆ Oಾ1ರಂŒಸುವ \ದಲು ಹ+Sಯ ಜನ=ಾದ ನಮ ೆ ಸMbಾದ EಾR^
ೕಡ,ೆ !ಾಗೂ ¨sÀÆ«ÄAiÀÄ£ÀÄß PÀ¼ÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀ gÉÊvÀjUÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÀÄlÄA§PÉÌ §zÀ°AiÀiÁV ¨ÉÃgÉqÉ
¨sÀÆ«Ä ªÀÄAdÆgÀÄ EಾಡುವA,ಾ< ಮತು ಪ1^ ಕುಟುಂಬದ ಒಬ•M ೆ ಉ,ೊHೕಗ :ೊ ಸುವA,ಾ<
!ಾಗೂ ನನ ಜ4ೕನು &ೇಲೂರು ನಗರ:ೆ; !ೊಂK:ೊಂ ರುವ :ಾರಣ ೇರ ಖMೕK ಮೂಲಕ ಜ4ೕ ೆ
ಸMbಾದ Eಾರುಕ`ೆ &ೆ$ೆ ಗK Eಾ Fೕಜ ೆ ೆ ಜ4ೕನನು ಭೂ5ಾU ೕನ Eಾ :ೊಳTS(ೇIೆ
ಎಂದು !ೇ+:ೊಂಡು ಇ^ೕdೆ ೆ ಎರಡು &ಾM ಮ ೆ ಹ^ರ ಅ]ಾUಸ ೆ ೕ !ೋ<ದು8 !ಾಗೂ
ಭೂ5ಾU ೕನ:ೆ; ಒಳಪಟ ಜ4ೕ ನ ರುವ ಕೃ... &ೆZೆಗ+ ೆ ಮತು (ೋಟ ಾM:ೆ &ೆZೆಗ+ ೆ ಮರಗ+ ೆ,
&ೇZೆ ೆ ಸೂಕ !ಾ Eಾರುಕ`ೆ &ೆ$ೆ :ೊಡುವA,ಾ< ನಂv !ಾಗೂ ಭೂ5ಾU ನ ಪ :ೊಳTSವ
ಜ4ೕ ೆ ಾವA !ೋಗದಂ(ೆ &ೆZೆ &ೆZೆಯದಂ(ೆ ತeೆ Eಾ ಅದ:ೆ;ಲ ಸೂಕ ಪM!ಾರ ೕಡು(ೇIೆ
ಎಂದು ^+ ದ (ಾವA ನಮV ಜ4ೕ ನ ರುವ &ೆZೆ ೆ ಸೂಕ !ಾಗೂ ಾHಯಯುಕ &ೆ$ೆ ೕಡ,ೆ ಮತು
ಇದ8 ಮರ <ಡಗಳ $ೆಕ; (ೆ ೆದು:ೊಳS,ೆ, (ಾವA ಇರುವ ಸpಳದ ತಮ ೆ ಇಷ ಬಂದ !ಾ ೆ ,ಾಖ$ೆ
ದ†ಪ :ೊಂಡು ನಮV ಸಮುVಖ bಾವA,ೇ ಪMೕxಲ ೆ ನeೆಸ,ೆ ಅ ಾಗ ಅ :ಾMಗಳನು ಬದ$ಾವYೆ
ನeೆ :ೊಂಡು, ಅ]ಾUಸ ೆ :ೊಟ ಅ :ಾM ಪAನಃ &ೇ=ೆeೆ ೆ ವ ಾ Eಾ :ೊಂಡು ಪAನಃ ಮ(ೊಬ• !ೊಸ
ಅ :ಾMಯನು ೇ4 ನಮV &ೇ :ೆ ಈeೇMಸ,ೆ ಅಕ1ಮIಾ< ಭೂ4ಯನು 5ಾU ನಪ :ೊಳSಲು
ಪ1ಯ^ ಸು^ದು8, ಇದMಂದ ನನ ೆ ಮತು ನನ ಕುಟುಂಬ vೕK ೆ ಬರುವಂ(ಾ<ದು8 ನನ ೈಸ< ಕ ಹಕ;ನು
ಉಲಂ• ನನ ನು ಮತು ನನ ಕುಟುಂಬದವರನು ಂ(ೆ ೆ ದೂ ರು^ೕರ.
(ಾವA ನಮV ಜ4ೕ ನ ಹ^ರ ಬಂದ ಸಂದಭ ದ ನನ ಜ4ೕನನು vಟು :ೊಡಲು ಾನು
ಒ‚_ರುವAKಲ. ಆದರೂ ನನ /ೕ$ೆ ಬಲವಂತ Eಾ ಒ(ಾಯ ಪ ನನ ಇdೆ' ೆ ರುದ†Iಾ< ಅIಾB
ೋ ಪeೆದು:ೊಳS&ೇಕು ಎಂದು !ೇ+ ಅIಾB ದು8 ಇದು :ಾನೂ ೆ ರುದ†Iಾ<ರುತ,ೆ.
!ಾಗೂ (ಾವA =ೈ$ೆU &ಾB ೇC Fೕಜ ೆಯನು &ೇ=ೆ ಕeೆ Eಾಡ ಬಹು,ಾದ ಅವ:ಾಶ ಇದ8ರೂ ಸಹ,
ಅದನು ಪMಗ‡ಸ,ೇ ¸ÀjAiÀiÁV ಸpಳ ಪMxೕಲ ೆ ನeೆಸ,ೆ, :ಾನೂ ೆ ರುದ†Iಾ< ಜನ 5ಾEಾನHರ
Eಾ^ ೆ &ೆ$ೆ :ೊಡ,ೆ, ಅ :ಾMಗZಾದ (ಾವA ತಮV ಇdೆ' ೆ (ಾವA ನಮV ಜ4ೕನುಗಳ /ೕ$ೆ =ೈ$ೆU
19
&ಾ1B ೇC Fೕಜ ೆ ೆ ಭೂ 5ಾU ೕನಪ :ೊಂಡು Iೈyಾ ಕವಲದ ಅIಾB Eಾ ರುವAದMಂದ
ನನ ೆ (ೊಂದ=ೆ ಉಂ`ಾ<ರುತ,ೆ.
ನನ ಜ4ೕನು ಉತಮ &ೆ$ೆ &ಾಳTವಂ^ದ8ರೂ ಇ,ಾHವAದನು ಪMಗಣ ೆ ೆ (ೆ ೆದು:ೊಳS,ೆ,
ಸpಳ ಪMxೕಲ ೆ Eಾಡ,ೆ, ಸMbಾದ ಪM!ಾರವನು ನನ ಫಲವ(ಾದ/ Iೇಶನದ ಜ4ೕ ೆ ಅIಾB
Eಾಡ,ೆ, ನನ ಜ4ೕ ೆ ¸ÀAಬಂ ದಂ(ೆ bಾವA,ೇ EಾR^ ೕಡದ ಕ / ಪM!ಾರವನು ಆ,ೇx
Eಾ ರುವAದು ಾHಯಯುತIಾ< ಇರುವAKಲ. ನನ ಜ4ೕನು bಾವA,ೇ Eಾರುಕ`ೆ , EೌಲH:ೆ;
ಅನುಗುಣIಾ< ಇರುವAKಲ. ಕ / ಅನು\ೕK ರುವAದು ನನ ೆ ತುಂಬ$ಾರದ ನಷ ಉಂ`ಾ<ರುತ,ೆ.
ಾನು ಈ Rಂ,ೆ ಮ ೆ ತಕ=ಾರನು ಸ :ೆ Eಾ ದು8 ಅದನು ಪMಗ‡ಸ,ೆ Eಾ ರುವ ಮV ಅIಾB
ಆ,ೇಶವA ನನ ನು ಬದ†ಪ ಸುವAKಲ.
ಾವA ನನ ಜ4ೕನನು ಭೂ5ಾU ೕನ EಾಡುವAದ)ಂತ ಮುಂ ಸದM ಜ4ೕ ನ =ಾ<,
€ೋಳ. ,ಾ+ಂ&ೆ ಶುಂ•, ]ೇಂ ಾ, ಕಬು•, ಮುಂ(ಾದ &ೆಳಗಳನು &ೆZೆದು ವಷ :ೆ; ಎಕ=ೆIಾರು 10 ಲ‰
ರೂಗಳನು ಆ,ಾಯ ತೂ ಸಂOಾದ ೆ Eಾಡು^ದ8ನು. ಆದ=ೆ ಭೂ 5ಾU ೕನIಾದ /ೕ$ೆ ನನ ೆ ಸMbಾದ
ಪM!ಾರ ಲ,ೆ ಇದ8 ಜ4ೕನು ಇಲ,ೆ ಾನು ಮತು ನನ ಕುಟುಂಬ ಪMತ‚ಸುವಂ(ಾ<,ೆ. ಸದM &ೆZೆಗಳ
ಬ ೆm ತಮV ಅIಾB ನ ಸMbಾದ EಾR^ ೕ ರುವAKಲ, Iಾ,ಾತVಕIಾ< ಅIಾB
ದ†ಪ ರುವAದು ಸM ಇರುವAKಲ.
(ಾವA ನನ ಜ4ೕ ೆ ಗ ಪ ರುವ ಾHಯಯುತವಲದ ಹಣವನು ಾನು ಪeೆದು:ೊಳSಲು
¹zÀÞjgÀĪÀÅ¢®è. vÁªÀÅ CªÁqïð ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀ ºÀt¢AzÀ £Á£ÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ £À£Àß PÀÄlÄA§ fêÀ£À
£ÀqɸÀ®Ä CxÀªÁ ಆ ಹಣKಂದ ನನ ಅಕ; ಪಕ;ದ ಅಥIಾ &ೇ=ೆ ಕeೆ ಕೃ... ಜ4ೕನು :ೊಳSಲು
5ಾಧH ಲದ :ಾರಣ ಎ$ಾ ಕeೆಗಳ (ಾವA ಗKಪ ರುವ ಹಣದ &ೆ$ೆ ೆ ಜ4ೕನನು ಖMೕK Eಾಡಲು
ಹುಡು)ದರೂ ಸಹ ಜ4ೕನು ಗ=ೆ ಕಂ ಾ$ಾ<ದು8, ಾನು !ೊಂKದ8 ಫಲವ(ಾದ ಜ4ೕನು (ಾವA
5ಾU ೕನ ಪ :ೊಳSಲು ಸಂಚು ರೂ‚ ರು^ೕರ. (ಾವA ನನ ಜ4ೕನನು ಭೂ 5ಾU ೕನ:ೆ;
ಒಳಪ ಸ$ೆ&ೇಕು ಎಂಬ ಉ,ೆ8ೕಶ:ೆ; ಬಂದ ಭೂ 5ಾU ೕನ:ೆ; ಒಳಪಡುವ ಜ4ೕ ನ ಅದರ ಅಕ; ಪಕ;ದ
ಉ+Kರುವ ಉಪFೕಗ:ೆ; Iಾರದ Mೕ^ ಇರುವ ಜ4ೕನನು ಭೂ5ಾU ೕನ ಪ :ೊಂಡು ಇದರ
ಬದ bಾ< #$ಾ !ೆ,ಾ8M ೆ !ೊಂK:ೊಂಡಂ(ೆ ಇರುವ ಫಲವ(ಾದ ಜ4ೕನನು ನಮV ಊMನ ಅಕ;
ಪಕ;ದ ನನ ೆ ಒ‚_ ೆ ಆಗುವಂತಹ ಜ4ೕನನು ನನ ೆ :ೊ :ೊಡ&ೇ:ಾ< :ೇ+:ೊಳTS(ೇ ೆ. Rೕ ೆ
ನನ ೆ ಬದ ಕೃ... ಜ4ೕನು :ೊ ಸುವAದMಂದ ಮ ೆ bಾವA,ೇ ಕಷ -ನಷ ಉಂ`ಾಗುವAKಲ.
(ಾIೇ ಾದರು ನನ ೆ ಬದ ಜ4ೕನು :ೊ ಸದ ಪ‰ದ ನನ ೆ ತುಂಬ$ಾರದ ಕಷ -ನಷ ಉಂ`ಾಗುತ,ೆ,
ಬದ ಜ4ೕ ನ ವHವ5ೆp Eಾ :ೊಡುವವ=ೆಗೂ (ಾವA ನನ ಮತು ನನ ಕುಟುಂಬದ #ೕವನ:ೆ; ^ಂಗಳ
ಭ(ೆH ೕಡ&ೇ:ಾ< ಈ ಮೂಲಕ :ೇ+ :ೊಳTS(ೇ ೆ. !ಾಗೂ (ಾವA ಭೂ 5ಾU ೕನ ಪ :ೊಂ ರುವ ನಮV
ಜ4ೕ ನ /ೕ$ೆ ಈ ಅ# ಯ ಬ ೆm ಇ(ಾHಥ ಪ ಸುವವ=ೆಗೂ ನನ ಭೂ4 ೆ (ಾವ ಾ ಅಥIಾ ತಮV
20
ಆ ೕನ ಗು^ ೆ,ಾರ=ಾ ಾ bಾವA,ೇ =ೈ$ೆU &ಾ1B ೇC :ೆಲಸ :ಾಯ Eಾಡ&ಾರ,ಾ<
:ೇ+:ೊಳTS(ೇ ೆ.
ನನ ೆ ಮತು ನಮV ಕುಟುಂಬ:ೆ; ಜ4ೕನನು Eಾ=ಾಟ Eಾಡುವ ಪ1/ೕಯIೇ ಒದ<
ಬಂKರುವAKಲ. :ಾರಣ ಾವA ಕೃ...ಯನು ಅವಲಂv #ೕವನ ನeೆಸುವ !ಾಗೂ ಾವA ಕೃ...ಯ
ಪM‡^ !ೊಂKರುವAದMಂದ ನಮ ೆ &ೇ=ೆ ಉ,ೊHೕಗ ಬರುವAKಲ. ನಮV ಬದು) ೆ #ೕವನ:ೆ; ಕೃ...tೕ
ಮೂಲˆಾರIಾ<ದು8 ನನ ೆ ಮತು ನನ ಕುಟುಂಬ:ೆ; ಮತು ಮಕ;ಳ ಮುಂKನ ಭ ಷH:ೆ; ಜ4ೕನು
ಅತHವಶHಕIಾ<ದು8 ಈ ಎ$ಾ dಾರಗಳT ತಮ ೆ ^+K,ಾ8ರು ಸಹ ನಮV ಒ‚_ ೆ ಇಲ,ೆ ನಮVಗ+ ೆ
(ೊಂದ=ೆ ಉಂಟುEಾ ರು^ೕರ.
ಈ ಎ$ಾ /ೕಲ;ಂಡ :ಾರಣಗ+ ೊಸ;ರ ಈ "ತ ಮನ ಯನು ಪMಗ‡ . ನನ &ಾ§ÄÛ =ೈ$ೆU
&ಾ1B ೇC Fೕಜ ೆ ೆ ಭೂ 5ಾU ೕನಪ :ೊಳSಲು !ೊರ ರುವ ಅIಾಡ ನು ರದು8 ಪ
ಜ4ೕ ೆ ಸೂಕIಾದ ಮತು :ಾನೂನು ಪ1:ಾರ ೕಡ&ೇ:ಾದ ಸಮಪ ಕ ಪM!ಾರವನು ಗ ಪ ಸಲು
ನ\VಂK ೆ ಚ ಸೂಕIಾದ &ೆ$ೆ ಗK ಪ ೇರ ಖMೕK ಅIಾB ಆ,ೇಶವನು
!ೊರ ಸ&ೇ:ೆಂದು ಮತು ಸಂಬಂ ದಂ(ೆ ಭೂ =ಾx1ತ=ಾದ ನಮV ಭೂ ಕುಟುಂಬದ ಒಬ•M ೆ
ಸೂಕIಾದ ಸ:ಾ M/ಆ=ೆ ಸ:ಾ M ಉ,ೊHೕಗ :ೊ ಸ&ೇ:ೆÉA§ ಮತು ಈ Mೕ^bಾ<
ವಶಪ :ೊಂ ರುವ ಜ4ೕ ನ ಸU^ ೆ ಬದ bಾ< 2 ಪಟು !ೆ „ನ ಭೂ ಪ1,ೇಶವನು ನಮ ೆ ಾ1ಂ"
Eಾಡ&ೇ:ಾ< ತಮV ಈ ಮೂಲಕ :ೇ+:ೋಳTS(ೇIೆ. ಅಥIಾ ಸದM ನಮV ಜ4ೕ ನ /ೕ$ೆ
ಭೂ5ಾU ನವನು :ೈvಟು &ೇ=ೆ ಕeೆ =ೈ$ೆU &ಾ1B ೇC ಅವ:ಾಶ ರುತ,ೆ. ಈ ಎ$ಾ dಾರಗಳT
^+Kದ8ರೂ ಸಹ (ಾವA ನಮ ೆ ಸಮVತವಲದ !ಾಗೂ &ೆ$ೆ &ಾಳTವ ನಮV ಜ4ೕನನು !ೇ ಾದರೂ
Eಾ ಭೂ 5ಾU ೕನ ಪ :ೊಳSಲು :ಾನೂನು ಸಮVತವಲದ !ಾಗೂ ನಮ ೆ ಒ‚_ ೆ ಇಲದ
ಅIೈyಾ ಕIಾದ ಆIಾB Eಾ ದು8 ಇದನು ಈ ತ‰ಣ Rಂಪeೆದು ಈ ಪತ1 ತಲು‚ದ 15 Kನಗಳ
:ಾಲದ ಾವA :ೇ+ರುವ ಮನ ೆ ಸ_ಂK ನಮ ೆ ಾHಯ ಒದ< :ೊಡ&ೇ:ಾ< ಉ$ೇ"ತ
ಅ# ಯ :ೋMರು^ೕM.
ಮV ಅ# ಯ ನ ಅಂಶಗಳನು ಪMxೕ ಸ$ಾ<ದು8, ಭೂ ಆಜ ೆಯ FೕಗH ¥ÀjºÁರ
ಮತು Oಾರದಶ ಕ(ೆ !ಾಗೂ ಪAನವ ಸ^ ಮತು ಪAನo ವHವ5ೆp ೆ ಅ :ಾರ ಅ ಯಮ, 2013ರ ಕಲಂ
11(1)ರ Oಾ1ಥ4ಕ ಅ ಸೂಚ ೆಯ ಪ1ಕ ರುವಂ(ೆ ಆbಾ ವಗ Iಾರು ಜ4ೕನುಗ+ ೆ ಧರ
ಗ ಪ ಸಲು ಆbಾ (ಾಲೂ)ನ ಉಪ ೋಂದYಾ :ಾMಗಳ :ಾbಾ ಲಯKಂದ ಕಲಂ 11(1)ರ
Oಾ1ಥ4ಕ ಅ ಸೂಚ ೆಯ K ಾಂಕ: 28/02/2019 Mಂದ 3 ವಷ ಗಳ RಂKನ Eಾಗ ಸೂ &ೆ$ೆಯಂ(ೆ
ಧರ ಗ ಪ ದು8 ಗ ಪ ರುವ ದರ:ೆ; 1.5 ಪಟು !ೆಚು„ವM \ತ 5ೇMಸ$ಾ<,ೆ. ಈ \ತ:ೆ;
100% 5ೋ$ೇ...ಯಂ !ಾಗೂ Eಾರುಕ`ೆ &ೆ$ೆ ೆ 12% !ೆಚು„ವM ಪM!ಾರ ಇದರ €ೊ(ೆ ೆ ಇ ಗಂಟು
\ತವನೂ ೕಡ$ಾ<ರುತ,ೆ ಈ ಎ$ಾ ವರಗಳನು 5ೇM ಕಲಂ 26 ರ Eಾನದಂಡಗಳಂ(ೆ ಅIಾB
21
ತbಾMಸ$ಾ<ರುತ,ೆ ಅದರಂ(ೆ ಅIಾB ನ ಗ ಪ ರುವ \ತªÀÅ ಾHಯಸಮVತIಾ<ರುತ,ೆ
ಎಂಬ ಅಂಶವನು ^+ಯಪ ಸು(ಾ ಅ# ಯನು ಮು:ಾಯ ೊ+ ,ೆ.
¸À»/-
«±ÉõÀ ¨sÀƸÁé¢üãÁ¢üPÁj,
!ೇEಾವ^ ಜ$ಾಶಯ /=ೈ$ೆU Fೕಜ ೆ !ಾಸನ."
It is after the aforesaid endorsement, the petitioners are before this
Court, on the submissions as afore-noted.
9.1. The first fold is with regard to non-compliance with
Section 19 of the Act. Section 19 of the Act reads as follows:
"19. Publication of declaration and summary of
Rehabilitation and Resettlement.--(1) When the appropriate
Government is satisfied, after considering the report, if any, made
under sub-section (2) of Section 15, that any particular land is
needed for a public purpose, a declaration shall be made to that
effect, along with a declaration of an area identified as the
"resettlement area" for the purposes of rehabilitation and
resettlement of the affected families, under the hand and seal of a
Secretary to such Government or of any other officer duly
authorised to certify its orders and different declarations may be
made from time to time in respect of different parcels of any land
covered by the same preliminary notification irrespective of
whether one report or different reports has or have been made
(wherever required).
(2) The Collector shall publish a summary of the
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Scheme along with draft
declaration referred to in sub-section (1):
Provided that no declaration under this sub-section shall be
made unless the summary of the Rehabilitation and Resettlement
Scheme is published along with such declaration:
Provided further that no declaration under this sub-section
shall be made unless the Requiring Body deposits an amount, in full
22
or part, as may be prescribed by the appropriate Government
toward the cost of acquisition of the land:
Provided also that the Requiring Body shall deposit the
amount promptly so as to enable the appropriate Government to
publish the declaration within a period of twelve months from the
date of the publication of preliminary notification under Section 11.
(3) In projects where land is acquired in stages, the
application for acquisition itself can specify different stages for the
rehabilitation and resettlement, and all declarations shall be made
according to the stages so specified.
(4) Every declaration referred to in sub-section (1) shall be
published in the following manner, namely:--
(a) in the Official Gazette;
(b) in two daily newspapers being circulated in the
locality, of such area of which one shall be in the
regional language;
(c) in the local language in the Panchayat, Municipality or
Municipal Corporation, as the case may be, and in the
offices of the District Collector, the Sub-Divisional
Magistrate and the Tehsil;
(d) uploaded on the website of the appropriate
Government;
(e) in the affected areas, in such manner as may be
prescribed.
(5) Every declaration referred to in sub-section (1) shall
indicate,--
(a) the district or other territorial division in which the
land is situated;
(b) the purpose for which it is needed, its approximate
area; and
23
(c) where a plan shall have been made for the land, the
place at which such plan may be inspected without
any cost.
(6) The declaration referred to in sub-section (1) shall be
conclusive evidence that the land is required for a public purpose
and, after making such declaration, the appropriate Government
may acquire the land in such manner as specified under this Act.
(7) Where no declaration is made under sub-section
(1) within twelve months from the date of preliminary
notification, then such notification shall be deemed to have
been rescinded:
Provided that in computing the period referred to in
this sub-section, any period or periods during which the
proceedings for the acquisition of the land were held up on
account of any stay or injunction by the order of any court
shall be excluded:
Provided further that the appropriate Government
shall have the power to extend the period of twelve months,
if in its opinion circumstances exist justifying the same:
Provided also that any such decision to extend the
period shall be recorded in writing and the same shall be
notified and be uploaded on the website of the authority
concerned."
(Emphasis supplied)
Section 19 of the Act mandates publication of declaration and
summary of Rehabilitation and Resettlement which would mean
completion of acquisition proceedings once they commence from
preliminary to the final and resultant award. Sub-section (7)
mandates that where no declaration under sub-section (1) is made
24
within 12 months from the date of preliminary notification, then
such notification shall be deemed to have been rescinded. There
are three provisos attached to the said provision. The first proviso
deals with computing the period of 12 months. The second proviso
empowers appropriate Government to extend the period of 12
months, if in its opinion circumstances exist justifying the same.
The third proviso indicates that if any decision to extend the period
of 12 months is to be taken, it should be on reasons recorded in
writing and the same to be notified and be uploaded on the website
of the Authority concerned.
9.2. As observed, the first fold revolves round sub-section (7)
of Section 19. Therefore, two dates assume significance i.e., the
date of preliminary notification and the date of final notification.
The date of preliminary notification was on 30-01-2019 and the
final notification was on 18-01-2023 which is admittedly beyond the
period of 12 months as is indicated in sub-section (7) of Section 19.
It is undoubtedly extendable in terms of the proviso to sub-section
(7) of Section 19. Whether there is compliance with the mandate of
the proviso is required to be noticed. The preliminary notification
25
which was said to expire on 26-08-2022 was extended on
15-09-2022. The notification of extension reads as follows:
"ಸಂzೆH:ಕಂಇ 07 ಎಕೂH!ೆ- 2020 ಕ ಾ ಟಕ ಸ:ಾ ರದ ಸ Iಾಲಯ,
ಬಹುಮಹ ಗಳ ಕಟ ಡ,
¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ:15-09-2022
ಅ ಸೂಚ ೆ
!ಾಸನ #$ೆ, &ೇಲೂರು (ಾಲೂಕು, ಕಸ&ಾ !ೋಬ+, ,ೊಡ./ೕದೂರು ಾ1ಮದ ನ 24-08
ಎಕ=ೆ ಜ4ೕನನು ಕ;ಮಗಳ@ರು-ಸಕ$ೇಶಪAರ !ೊಸ =ೈ$ೆU &ಾ1B ೇC Fೕಜ ೆಯ ಉ,ೆ8ೕಶ:ಾ;<
ಭೂ5ಾU ೕನಪ :ೊಳSಲು "ಭೂ5ಾU ೕನ ಪ )1tಯ Oಾರದಶ ಕ(ೆ, ಸೂಕ ಪM!ಾರದ ಹಕು;
ಪAನವ ಸ^ ಮತು ಪAನo Eಾ ಣ :ಾt8 2013"ರ ಕಲಂ-19(7)ರ ಸ:ಾ ರ:ೆ; ಪ1ದತIಾದ
ಅ :ಾರವನು ಚ$ಾ-- , ಈ ಪ1ಕರಣದ ಕಲಂ-19(1)(2)ರ ಅಂ^ಮ ಅ ಸೂಚ ೆಯನು !ೊರ ಸಲು
¢£ÁAPÀ : 27-08-2022 Mಂದ ¢£ÁAPÀ : 26-02-2023 gÀªÀgÉUÉ :ಾ$ಾವ ಯನು ಸM
ಆ,ೇxಸ$ಾ<,ೆ.
ಕ ಾ ಟಕ =ಾಜHOಾಲರ ಆyಾನು5ಾರ
ಮತು ಅವರ !ೆಸMನ ,
¸À»/-
(x1ೕ Iಾಸ ಎ.)
ಸ:ಾ ರದ ಅ ೕನ :ಾಯ ದx ,
ಕಂ,ಾಯ ಇ$ಾzೆ (ಭೂ5ಾU ೕನ 1&3)"
The time was extended up to 26-02-2023. On 18-01-2023 comes
the final notification.
9.3. The issue now would be, whether the notification dated
15-09-2022 is in tune with the aforesaid provisions. The
26
interpretation of sub-section (7) of Section 19 of the Act need not
detain this Court for long or delve deep into the mater. A coordinate
Bench of this Court in the case of C.H. CHANDRAPPA v. STATE
OF KARNATAKA1, has held as follows:
".... .... ....
2. A notification under Section 11(1) of the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short hereinafter
referred to as "the 2013 Act") dated 23.04.2020 was published
in the Gazette on 24.04.2020.
3. Approval of the State Government was granted under
Section 15(3) of the 2013 Act.
4. On 23.02.2021, the Deputy Commissioner sought for
extension of time to issue the declaration under Section 19(1) of
the 2013 Act and this request was approved by the Additional
Chief Secretary on 16.03.2021.
5. It is not in dispute that though an order came to be
passed on 29.03.2021, the said order was not notified in the
Gazette. The extension that was sought to be granted was for
publication of the declaration from 05.03.2021 to 05.06.2021.
6. It is also not in dispute that the period of 12
months prescribed under Section 19(7) of the 2013 Act
was on 23.04.2021, by which time an order had been
passed extending the time till 05.06.2021, but the said
order was not notified as required under Section 19(7) of
the 2013 Act.
7. It is also stated by the learned AAG that there were
two subsequent notifications issued extending the time to
publish the declaration on 30.06.2021 and 22.09.2021 and
1
Writ Petition No.3768 of 2023 decided on 22-04-2024
27
subsequently, a declaration was issued on 01.10.2021, i.e,.
within a period of 12 months.
8. Section 19(7) of the 2013 Act reads as follows: -
"19 (7) Where no declaration is made under sub-
section (1) within twelve months from the date of
preliminary notification, then such notification shall be
deemed to have been rescinded:
Provided that in computing the period referred to
in this sub-section, any period of periods during which
the proceedings for the acquisition of the land were held
up on account of any stay or injunction by the order of
any Court shall be excluded:
Provided further that the appropriate
Government shall have the power to extend the period
of twelve months, if in its opinion circumstances exist
justifying the same:
Provided also that any such decision to extend
the period shall be recorded in writing and the same
shall be notified and be uploaded on the website of the
authority concerned."
9. As could be seen from the above, the statutory
provision declares that a declaration under Section 19(1)
of the 2013 Act, if not made within 12 months from the
date of preliminary notification, shall be deemed to have
been rescinded. Therefore, the preliminary notification
under Section 11 of the 2013 Act, by operation of law will
stood rescinded if the declaration is not made within 12
months.
10. For this rescission of the preliminary
notification, the only requirement is the inaction on the
part of the State in issuing the declaration. There are 3
provisos to Section 19(7) of the 2013 Act: the first
proviso which relates to exclusion of time in the event of
any interim order granted by the Court, will not be
applicable to this case because admittedly there is no
interim order granted which impeded the issuance of
declaration
28
11. The second proviso confers power on the
Government to extend the period of 12 months if in its
opinion there are circumstances which justify the
extension.
12. However, this power is circumscribed by third
proviso which categorically states that the decision to
extend the period should be: (a) recorded in writing; and
(b) notified and be uploaded on the website of the
authority concerned.
13. It is therefore clear that though the
Government has been conferred with the power to extend
the period of 12 months it is required to comply with two
requirements, which by the language of the third proviso,
makes is mandatory.
14. The first obligation under the third proviso is to notify
the decision which is recorded in writing to extend the time
prescribed for issuance of the declaration. The term
"notification" has been defined under Section 3(v) of the Act and
reads as follows:
"notification" means a notification published in
the Gazette of India or, as the case may be, the Gazette
of a State and the expression "notify" shall be construed
accordingly;
15. It is thus clear that in order to take the benefit
of power to extend the period of 12 months provided
under the second proviso, the State Government is
obliged, mandatorily, to publish the order which is
recorded in writing to an extent the period of 12 months.
If this Notification is not published in the Gazette, by
virtue of the phrase used in 12(7) "be deemed to have
been rescinded" would automatically come into
operation.
16. To put it in simple words, if the decision to
extend the period to issue a declaration is not recorded
and notified, by operation of law, the preliminary
Notification is deemed to have been rescinded. In this
view of the matter, in the instant case, since the decision
29
to extend the period of 12 months has not been notified
in the Gazette, the preliminary Notification stood
automatically rescinded.
17. However, learned Additional Advocate General sought
to place reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of Urmila Roy and Others vs. Bengal Peerless
Housing Development Company Limited And Others,
(2009)5 SCC 242 to contend that the petitioner had made a
claim for compensation and he had, therefore, waived a right to
challenge the acquisition. It is to be stated here that the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in that case was not considering a provision
which was in pari materia in Section 19(7) and, therefore, that
decision would not have any application.
18. It is also to be noticed that there is no question of
waiver of the operation of law by the land loser, in case the
preliminary Notification is, by law, deemed to have been
rescinded. If the Notification issued under Section 11 stands
statutorily rescinded, the question as to whether the petitioner
waived his right to challenge the acquisition or not would be
irrelevant.
19. In that view of the matter, the above said argument
cannot be accepted. As a consequence, the impugned
Notifications are quashed and the Writ Petition is allowed."
(Emphasis supplied)
The coordinate Bench interprets sub-section (7) of Section 19 of the
Act. The order of extension was found to be contrary to the
proviso, as it was not notified in the official gazette. The extension
sought to be granted was for publication of final notification. As it
was not done within 12 months period, the acquisition proceedings
30
were quashed and liberty was reserved to the State Government to
initiate proceedings afresh.
9.4. Later, another coordinate Bench of this Court in the case
of K. GANGANNA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA2, considering
this very provision has held as follows:
".... .... ....
5. For developmental work and in the interest of
general public, the State is always empowered to
exercise its power of eminent domain and acquire the
lands required. However, the same has to be done in the
manner to known to law. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in
COMPETENT AUTHORITY v. BARANGORE JUTE FACTORY
reported in (2005)13 SCC 477 at paragraph 14 has held
as under:
"14. Having held that the impugned notification
regarding acquisition of land is invalid because it fails
to meet the statutory requirements and also having
found that taking possession of the land of the
writpetitioners in the present case in pursuance of
the said notification was not in accordance with law,
the question arises as to what relief can be granted to
the petitioners. The High Court rightly observed that
the acquisition of land in the present case was for a
project of great national importance i.e. the
construction of a national highway. The construction
of a national highway on the acquired land has
already been completed as informed to us during the
course of hearing. No useful purpose will be served
by quashing the impugned notification at this stage.
We cannot be unmindful of the legal position that the
acquiring authority can always issue a fresh
notification for acquisition of the land in the event of
the impugned notification being quashed.The
consequence of this will only be that keeping in view
the rising trend in prices of land, the amount of
2
Writ Petition No.21451 of 2023 decided on 09-12-2024
31
compensation payable to the landowners may be
more. Therefore, the ultimate question will be about
the quantum of compensation payable to the
landowners. Quashing of the notification at this stage
will give rise to several difficulties and practical
problems. Balancing the rights of the petitioners as
against the problems involved in quashing the
impugned notification, we are of the view that a
better course will be to compensate the landowners,
that is, the writ petitioners appropriately for
whatthey have been deprived of. Interests of justice
persuade us to adopt this course of action."
6. In the present circumstances, the property is
sought to be acquired for the purpose of a Railway
project, which is of national importance and under the
circumstances, I am of the opinion that the Court should
be reluctant to set aside the acquisition being done.
However, care should be taken that the petitioner is duly
compensated for the loss of his lands.
7. The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in
Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 was
passed with the following objective as reflected in the preamble
of the statute:
"An Act to ensure, in consultation with
institutions of local self-government and Gram Sabhas
established under the Constitution, a humane,
participative, informed and transparent process for land
acquisition for industrialisation, development of essential
infrastructural facilities and urbanisation with the least
disturbance to the owners of the land and other affected
families and provide just and fair compensation to the
affected families whose land has been acquired or
proposed to be acquired or are affected by such
acquisition and make adequate provisions for such
affected persons for their rehabilitation and resettlement
and for ensuring that the cumulative outcome of
compulsory acquisition should be that affected persons
become partners in development leading to an
improvement in their post-acquisition social and
economic status and for matters connected therewith or
incidental thereto."
32
8. For the said reason, the statute contemplates that a
final notification has to be published within a period of twelve
months from the date of publication of the preliminary
notification, keeping in mind that award to be passed, shall take
into consideration the value of the land as on the date of
issuance of the preliminary notification. A preliminary
notification is issued as per the provisions of Section 11(1) of
the Act. Thereafter, persons are prohibited from making
transaction in respect of the land concerned. Section 11(4) of
the Act reads as under:
"11. Publication of preliminary notification and
power of officers thereupon
(1) xxx
(2) xxx
(3) xxx
(4) No person shall make any transaction or cause
any transaction of land specified in the preliminary
notification or create any encumbrances on such land from
the date of publication of such notification till such time as
the proceedings under this Chapter are completed:
PROVIDED that the Collector may, on the application
made by the owner of the land so notified, exempt in
special circumstances to be recorded in writing, such owner
from the operation of this sub-section:
PROVIDED FURTHER that any loss or injury suffered
by any person due to his willful violation of this provision
shall not be made up by the Collector."
9. Section 19(1) of the Act reads as under:
"19. Publication of declaration and summary of
Rehabilitation and Resettlement
(1) When the appropriate Government is satisfied,
after considering the report, if any, made under sub section
(2) of section 15, that any particular land is needed for a
public purpose, a declaration shall be made to that effect,
along with a declaration of an area identified as the
"resettlement area" for the purposes of rehabilitation and
33
resettlement of the affected families, under the hand and
seal of a Secretary to such Government or of any other
officer duly authorised to certify its orders and different
declarations may be made from time to time in respect of
different parcels of any land covered by the same preliminary
notification irrespective of whether one report or different
reports has or have been made (wherever required)."
9(i) Section 19(7) of the Act reads as under:
"(7) Where no declaration is made under sub-section
(1) within twelve months from the date of preliminary
notification, then such notification shall be deemed to have
been rescinded:
PROVIDED that in computing the period referred to
in this sub-section, any period or periods during which the
proceedings for the acquisition of the land were held up on
account of any stay or injunction by the order of any Court
shall be excluded:
PROVIDED FURTHER that the appropriate
Government shall have the power to extend the period of
twelve months, if in its opinion circumstances exist
justifying the same:
PROVIDED ALSO that any such decision to extend
the period shall be recorded in writing and the same shall
be notified and be uploaded on the website of the authority
concerned."
9(ii) Section 25 of the Act pertains to making an award
and it reads as under:
"25. Period within which an award shall be made:
The Collector shall make an award within a period of
twelve months from the date of publication of the
declaration under section 19 and if no award is made within
that period, the entire proceedings for the acquisition of the
land shall lapse:
PROVIDED that the appropriate Government shall
have the power to extend the period of twelve months if in
its opinion, circumstances exist justifying the same:
34
PROVIDED FURTHER that any such decision to
extend the period shall be recorded in writing and the same
shall be notified and be uploaded on the website of the
authority concerned."
9(iii) Proviso to Section 26(1) of the Act reads as under:
"26. Determination of market value of land by
Collector:
(1) The Collector shall adopt the following criteria in
assessing and determining the market value of the land,
namely:--
(a) the market value, if any, specified in the
Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899) for the
registration of sale deeds or agreements to
sell, as the case may be, in the area, where
the land is situated; or
(b) the average sale price for similar type of land
situated in the nearest village or nearest
vicinity area; or
(c) consented amount of compensation as agreed
upon under sub-section (2) of section 2 in
case of acquisition of lands for private
companies or for public private partnership
projects,
whichever is higher:
PROVIDED that the date for determination of market
value shall be the date on which the notification has been
issued under section 11."
10. Thus, perusal of the aforementioned provisions
makes it clear that the Act contemplates completion of
the acquisition proceedings within a time frame failing
which the acquisition proceedings stands lapsed, so that
undue hardship is not caused to the person losing the
said land. However, it does not prohibit the State from
again initiating acquisition proceedings by invoking its
power of eminent domain. In other words, the intention
of the legislature is that final notification and passing of
the award has to be completed within a specified time
35
frame, so that the petitioner is duly compensated and he
will not feel cheated due to the acquisition proceedings
by the State. That is the intention of the legislature.
Further, as reflected in the preamble of the statute, the Act
intends to facilitate acquisition of the land for developmental
purposes in public interest done by the State.
11. With regard to extension of time, the Act also
contemplates a situation wherein it may not be feasible
for the State to complete issuance of a final notification
within the specified period of one year from the date of
issuance of the preliminary notification for various
reasons and for that reason, extension is provided for
under Section 19(7) of the Act. However, this provision
has to be treated as an exception to the rule of issuance
of final notification within one year from the date of
issuance of the preliminary notification and the exception
cannot eat away the rule. It cannot be interpreted in a
manner so as to defeat the just compensation that the
land loser would be entitled to.
12. Further, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex
Court in (2005)13 SCC 477 stated above, the law should not be
interpreted to thwart the developmental work taken up by the
State in public interest, relying upon technicalities.
13. Under the given peculiar facts and
circumstances of the case, wherein the land is sought to
be acquired for public purpose that is for development of
infrastructure for the railways, wherein extension of time
was warranted due to the extraordinary COVID-19
situation and the death of the jurisdictional Special Land
Acquisition Officer albeit the notifications were issued for
extension of time belatedly with retrospective effect and
the petition having been filed without making the
beneficiary 'Indian Railways' a party to the proceedings
and also taking into consideration the fact that the
petitioner had not objected for acquisition of his lands
after issuance of the preliminary notification, I am of the
opinion that interest of justice would be met if the date
for determination of market value of the lands concerned
for passing of an award in favour of the petitioner is fixed
one year prior to the issuance of final notification i.e., on
36
09.04.2022 instead of 19.06.2020, which is the date of
issuance of the preliminary notification and upholding the
acquisition.
14. The State contends that objections have not been
filed to the preliminary notification. However, the same is
disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. However, the
learned counsel for the petitioner submits that challenge to the
acquisition is on the ground of delay in publishing the final
notification and not on the ground that he has raised any
objections to the preliminary notification.
15. Hence, the following:
ORDER
(i) The act of the respondents in acquiring the lands
belonging to the petitioner, which are the subject
matter of the writ petition, is hereby upheld;
(ii) However, respondent no.2 is directed to pass the
necessary award in respect of the lands concerned
by taking into consideration the market value of
the lands as on 09.04.2022;
(iii) The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly."
(Emphasis Supplied)
9.5. In the light of the judgments rendered by two of the
Coordinate Benches, one quashing acquisition proceedings itself on
the ground that the procedure for extension of time was not
followed by the State and the other upholding the acquisition
notwithstanding the extension not being passed within the time
limit prescribed under sub-section (7) of Section 19. What is
necessary to be considered is any interpretation of the said
provision should not lead to stifling of acquisition proceedings. The
acquisition proceedings must be upheld, particularly when it is for
public purpose. In the case at hand, it is undoubtedly for public
purpose i.e., laying of a railway line. Learned counsel appearing for
the respondents would vehemently contend that laying of the
railway line has been stopped due to the interim order subsisting in
the case at hand. The procedure that is not followed in extension is
by the State Government. The railway line would benefit scores and
scores of people and therefore, this Court must not interfere with
the acquisition. This is what is considered by the subsequent
judgment of the Coordinate Bench in the case of K.Ganganna. It
being a later judgment of the Coordinate Bench, I deem it
appropriate to follow the same in so far as the first ground
projected by the petitioners qua violation of sub-section (7) of
section 19 of the Act. I, therefore, hold that the acquisition does
not get vitiated on account of the semblance of aberration that is
projected by the petitioners. As a matter of fact, the extension has
not taken place within the time frame, but nonetheless, there is a
gazette notification of extension.
10. The other statutory violation projected is, violation of
Section 21 of the Act. Section 21 of the Act reads as follows:
"21. Notice to persons interested.--(1) The
Collector shall publish the public notice on his website
and cause public notice to be given at convenient places
on or near the land to be taken, stating that the
Government intends to take possession of the land, and
that claims to compensations and rehabilitation and
resettlement for all interests in such land may be made to
him.
(2) The public notice referred to in sub-section (1)
shall state the particulars of the land so needed, and
require all persons interested in the land to appear
personally or by agent or advocate before the Collector at
a time and place mentioned in the public notice not being
less than thirty days and not more than six months after
the date of publication of the notice, and to state the
nature of their respective interests in the land and the
amount and particulars of their claims to compensation
for such interests, their claims to rehabilitation and
resettlement along with their objections, if any, to the
measurements made under Section 20.
(3) The Collector may in any case require such statement
referred to in sub-section (2) to be made in writing and signed
by the party or his agent.
(4) The Collector shall also serve notice to the same
effect on the occupier, if any, of such land and on all such
persons known or believed to be interested therein, be entitled
to act for persons so interested, as reside or have agents
authorised to receive service on their behalf, within the revenue
district in which the land is situated.
(5) In case any person so interested resides elsewhere,
and has no such agent, the Collector shall ensure that the notice
shall be sent to him by post in letter addressed to him at his last
known residence, address of place or business and also publish
the same in at least two national daily newspapers and also on
his website."
(Emphasis supplied)
Section 21(1) mandates the Collector to publish public notice on the
website stating that the Government intends to take possession of
the land and claims of compensation by all interested in the land be
made to him. Sub-section (2) mandates that the State shall require
all persons interested in the land to appear personally at the time
and place mentioned in the notice not more than six months from
the date of publication of the notice and submit their grievances
against the determination. Section 23 of the Act reads as follows:
"23. Enquiry and land acquisition award by
Collector.--On the day so fixed, or on any other day to
which the enquiry has been adjourned, the Collector shall
proceed to enquire into the objections (if any) which any
person interested has stated pursuant to a notice given
under Section 21, to the measurements made under Section
20, and into the value of the land at the date of the publication
of the notification, and into the respective interests of the
persons claiming the compensation and rehabilitation and
resettlement, shall make an award under his hand of--
(a) the true area of the land;
(b) the compensation as determined under Section 27 along
with Rehabilitation and Resettlement award as
determined under Section 31 and which in his opinion
should be allowed for the land; and
(c) the apportionment of the said compensation among all
the persons known or believed to be interested in the
land, or whom, or of whose claims, he has information,
whether or not they have respectively appeared before
him."
(Emphasis supplied)
Section 23 deals with enquiry and land acquisition award by the
Collector. This again refers to the enquiry by the Collector for
hearing any person interested who had been issued a notice under
Section 21 of the Act. Therefore, the requirement is grant of
personal hearing under Section 21(2) of the Act which is carried
forward to Section 23.
11. The interpretation of Sections 21 and 23 of the Act need
not detain this court for long or delve deep into the matter. The
Apex Court in the case of TIRUPATI DEVELOPERS v. UNION
TERRITORY OF DADRA & NAGAR HAVELI3 holds as follows:
".... .... ....
7. In the case at hand, the appellant has not been
accorded hearing in terms of Section 21 of the 2013 Act.
Thus, in the absence of objections, which the appellant
could not file for the reasons beyond its control, no
inquiry as per Section 23 of the 2013 Act could be held.
2023 SCC OnLine SC 2179
8. For a fair and just determination of compensation
within the statutory scheme of the 2013 Act, it is
imperative that a fair opportunity of hearing is given to
the persons whose rights are affected. This requires that
the interested person is given an effective opportunity to
put forth his or her claim. Any deviation to the prescribed
procedure, especially when it has seemingly affected the
interested person, would militate with the very object of
legislative mandate.
9. We are, thus, of the view that the appropriate
recourse would be that the Collector-respondent no. 3
must give one opportunity to the appellant to submit its
objections, if any, followed by a personal hearing to the
authorized representative, and then pass an appropriate
award after holding inquiry under Section 23 of the Act.
10. For the reasons afore-stated, the appeal is allowed in
part and the award dated 04.05.2020 passed in respect of the
acquired land of the appellant is set aside together with the
impugned judgment and order of the High Court. The
Collector-respondent no. 3 is directed to issue a fresh
notice to the appellant under Section 21 of the 2013 Act
within two weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of
this order. The appellant shall submit its objections, if
any, within the stipulated period. The Collector shall,
thereafter, hear the appellant's representative and pass
award afresh after conducting inquiry in accordance with
the scheme of 2013 Act.
11. The Collector shall pass the award as early as
possible but not later than three months from the date of
receipt of the copy of this order."
(Emphasis supplied)
The Apex Court holds that the appellant has not been accorded
hearing in terms of Section 21 of the Act. In the absence of
objections, no inquiry under Section 23 could be held. Therefore,
the foundation is personal hearing under Section 21. The award
challenged before the Apex Court was set aside on the aforesaid
interpretation. In the case at hand as well, there is no personal
hearing granted to the petitioners, the land loser.
12. A Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay in the case
of SHREE NASIK PANCHAVATI PANJRAPOLE v. DISTRICT
COLLECTOR4 considering this very issue of grant of personal
hearing and right to be heard, has held as follows:
"..... .... ....
13. In this case, we are concerned with Section 21(2)
because the notice dated 16 June 2023 was issued under
Section 21(2) of the said Act. This provision, in terms,
provides that public notice referred to in Section 21(1)
must state the particulars of the land so needed and
require all persons interested in the land to appear
personally or by agent or advocate before the Collector at
a time and place mentioned in the public notice not being
less than thirty days and not more than six months after
the date of publication of the notice, and to state the
nature of their respective interests in the land and the
amount and particulars of their claims to compensation
for such interests, their claims to rehabilitation and
resettlement along with their objections, if any, to the
measurements made under section 20.
2025 SCC OnLine Bom 547
14. Thus, it is clear that notice under Section 21(2)
must give the persons interested liberty to object by
filing appropriate written objections and also appear
personally or through Advocate before the Collector at
the place and time mentioned in such notice. Section
21(2) explicitly provides that such a date must not be
less than 30 days from the notice's publication date. In
the present case, the notice was published on 16 June 2023, but
the date and time fixed were only 27 June 2023, much less than
the minimum 30-day period provided under Section 21(2) of the
said Act.
15. Be that as it may, the Petitioners, through its
Advocate, filed the objections on 3 July 2023 i.e. within
30 days of the publication of Section 21(2) notice dated
16 June 2023. The impugned Award was on 23 November
2023. Thus, on 3 July 2023 and 23 November 2023, the
Land Acquisition Collector had ample time to comply with
the requirements of Sections 21 and 23 of the said Act
and hear the representative of the Petitioner or the
Petitioner's Advocate before the impugned Award could
be made and published. Still, neither the representative
of the Petitioner nor the advocates were heard before the
impugned Award was made on 23 November 2023.
16. In Tirupati Developers (supra), Section 21
notice was issued on 04 March 2020. On 20 March 2020,
the Petitioners requested the Collector additional time to
file objections and appear before the Collector due to the
COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown in Mumbai. Without
considering such a request, the Collector made an award
on 04 May 2020. This Court dismissed the Petition to
challenge the Award by granting the Petitioner liberty to
seek enhanced compensation through the process of
Section 64 of the 2013 Act.
17. However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court reversed
this Court by observing that under Section 22, interested
persons are entitled to make a statement before the
Collector, whereupon the Collector is obligated to hold an
inquiry on the objections submitted by the interested
persons and pass an Award. The Court held that the right
to pursue the objections by seeking a reference under
Section 64 is a later stage, i.e. "after the Collector has
followed the procedure prescribed under Chapter IV of
the 2013 Act, and culminating into determination of
compensation and passing of the award."
18. The Hon'ble Supreme Court noted that the
Petitioners had not been accorded a hearing in terms of
Section 21 of the 2013 Act. In the absence of objections,
which the Petitioners could not file for reasons beyond its
control, no inquiry as per Section 23 of the 2013 Act
could be held. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, crucially
observed that for a fair and just determination of
compensation within the statutory scheme of the 2013
Act, it is imperative that a fair opportunity of hearing is
given to the persons whose rights are affected. This
requires that the interested person is given an effective
opportunity to put forth his or her claim. Any deviation to
the prescribed procedure, especially when it has
seemingly affected the interested person, would militate
with the very object of legislative mandate.
19. The Hon'ble Supreme Court quashed the
impugned Award and directed the Collector to give the
Petitioners an opportunity to submit objections, if any,
followed by a personal hearing to the authorised
representative and then pass an appropriate Award after
holding an inquiry under Section 23 of the said Act.
20. Mr. Dighe emphasised a stray line in paragraph
8, which reads, "The interested person is given an
effective opportunity to put forth his or his claim". Based
upon this, he submitted that the Petitioner in the present
matter was given such opportunity because the
objections filed by the Petitioner's advocate were duly
considered in the impugned Award.
21. The sentence relied upon by Mr. Dighe must be
read in the context. Before this sentence, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, in no uncertain terms, observed that for a
fair and just determination of compensation within the
statutory scheme of the 2013 Act, it is imperative that a
fair opportunity of hearing is given to the persons whose
rights are affected. Besides, after the statement relied
upon by Mr. Dighe, the Hon'ble Supreme Court
observed, "Any deviation to the prescribed procedure,
especially when it has seemingly affected the interested
person, would militate with the very object of legislative
mandate".
22. Thus, the mere consideration of the objections
filed by the Petitioner through its lawyer would not be a
substitute for the fair opportunity of hearing either to the
Petitioner's representatives or the Petitioner's advocate
in terms of the statutory scheme of the said Act. The
impugned Award thus warrants interference on the short
ground that no opportunity of hearing was granted to the
Petitioner or its advocate before it was made.
23. In Kolkata Municipal Corporation v. Bimal Kumar
Shah2 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that while the right
to property drifted from Part II to Part XII of the Constitution,
there continues to be a potent safety net against arbitrary
acquisitions, hasty decision-making and unfair redressal
mechanisms. Despite its spatial placement, Article 300-A which
declares that "no person shall be deprived of his property save
by authority of law" has been characterised both as a
constitutional and also a human right. To assume that
constitutional protection gets constricted to the mandate of a
fair compensation would be a disingenuous reading of the text
and, shall we say, offensive to the egalitarian spirit of
the Constitution.
24. The Hon'ble Supreme Court further held that the
State action or the legislation that results in the deprivation of
private property must be measured against the sub-rights or
strands illustrated in paragraph 29, not just one or many of its
strands. In paragraph 30, the Hon'ble Supreme Court
observed that one of the sub-rights or strands of this
Swadeshi constitutional fabric constituting the property
right was the State's duty to hear objections to the
acquisitions - the right to be heard. The second was the
duty of the State to inform the person of its decision to
acquire - the right to a reasoned decision. The Court held
that the seven sub-rights are the foundational
components of a law that is in tune with Article 300-A,
and the absence of one of these or some of them would
render the law susceptible to challenge.
25. The argument that there was no prejudice as such to
the Petitioner for want of compliance with statutory provisions
embodying the principles of natural justice is not readily
entertained. Non-compliance with natural justice can itself, in
some situations, amount to prejudice. There is a considerable
difference between filing written objections prepared by
an advocate and an oral hearing where the party or his
advocate can persuade the decision maker of the merits
of its version. In any event, if the legislature has provided
a personal hearing or hearing through an advocate, then
such procedure cannot be lightly deviated from without
any strong reasons.
26. Here, Section 21(2) notice itself, did not give
the persons interested the minimum prescribed time to
lodge objections. Though such a contention may no
longer hold good now, the impugned Award deserves to
be set aside, because no personal hearing was granted to
the Petitioner or its advocate before the impugned Award
was made."
(Emphasis supplied)
The petitioners, in the cases at hand, have submitted their
objections to the final notification. Therefore, Section 21 permits
the petitioners to be heard, more so, in the light of the fact of gross
variations with the extent of acquisition insofar as the award and
the actual acquisition. Written objections though filed by the
petitioners and appears to have been considered, it would not be in
compliance with the mandate of the statute which requires personal
hearing to be granted. In the case before the High Court of Bombay
written objections were though filed it was held that written
objections being filed by the Advocate would not mean that there is
compliance with the mandate of personal hearing. There is no
document produced to show that the inquiry has been conducted
under Section 23 of the Act, after following the procedure under
Section 21 of the Act in the case at hand. In that light, the petition
deserves to succeed, albeit in part. The challenge to the acquisition
fails, but the challenge to the violation of Section 21 of the Act
succeeds.
ORDER
(i) Writ Petitions are allowed in part.
(ii) The acquisition stands sustained.
(iii) Mandamus issues to the respondent/State to hear the
petitioners as obtaining under Section 21(2) of the
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
and then redraw the award in accordance with law,
bearing in mind the observations made in the course of
the order.
(iv) This order shall be complied with within three months
from the date of the order.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE
bkp
CT:MJ
