Karnataka High Court
Sri G V Sridhar @ Srikanth vs The Addl Land Acquisition Officer on 21 June, 2010
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy
Bench: Ram Mohan Reddy
E1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA. "~ H
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF' JUNE, :"2OO1O- VA % D '
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE_.RAMjVi0HA}iA V
WRIT PETITION NO. 14465 DE 2098 '(BD;gx)
BETWEEN
Sri. G.V. S1'1'dh_ar'&; s.nk:;n:.1_a,_f,: _ _ .
S/O G. "
Aged about 38 y"ea1}S;7..__ ' V; _ _ '
No.36/4, llliam-ai':1 RO<:Ld--,. .,
Vadde11':--3Lf)éi1yaAVRoad? " > "
Kengeafrl Sa_l,e1}ite.'T.O_wn, v
Banga1cs:e é«_5esO_ 060
..PETITIONER
{By M /s ES€:KAY 'Asso.;;1'a:g%.!s,_
Sri. Swazny Shiva 'P1'akash and
* _ Sri.,':L_'E"%i.. K1fis1}nan1i:1'1Vhy-I\/I. Advs.}
E. The Add}. Land Acquisition
.O"fffi(:€r.
"§T11ré Bangaiore Developrnemi
r Aijthority.
Chowdaiah Road.
' Bangalore ~ 560 020.
V " Tlu: C0111.'{I}iSSiO11€1'
Baxlgalore DeveEOpm€11t. Aui.hOrii.y.
Chowdaiah Road.
Ba11gz2.1();'€ -- 560 001. ..RESPONDENT
éri (By Sri. S. Shankar Goud, Adv.) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles" aéfid l of the Constitution of India praying __to..q__uash th'e'~.ifmp'ugI:.edvt. order passed by the l-'*'- I'€SpOFld€1'1t1:d3.1;6C:1'29'._8.2OQ.8._flfiv'p€I' AI1neXure~E. THIS PETITION COMINGlt)i'~l_FOI§'PRL-,HEAR1'N.QHIN3 3* GROUP THIS DAY. THE COURT MADE THE._FOLLOWING:
;_ Even for the petitioner oft of land in Sy.No.3Sf4..'VAV'A'oi.t Kengeri Hobli, Barigaloifel' the respondent.--Bangalore
l)eVelt)pmelI1t =ALIthoriltiytll'(BDA) under the Bangalore "V"~._ADexIe'l()p.rI'1€:.I1i AcI,;'v---.'1.9"76, for short the 'Act', by issuirig __p'!'e_limiI--2aiy" 1_1otificat,iorI under Section 17 of the Act the Gazette on 2.2.1989 and the final r1()tifi(§&1ti1()I1 dt. l9.1 1.1994 when called in question by it-,Ati1--e fietitioner in W.P.No.6808/ 1995, this Court quashed final notification and remitted the proceedings to the BDA for fresh corisideratiion. Thereaiterwards, the pet.itioI'1eI' when extetided the opport.LII1ity of hearing,
-1 ._ J.
filed objections to the preliminary notification, "
to the rejection of the objections and iss1..1,e4_'~-of'fir1a1' notification followed by the a.V{_ard.,_iy' j. claimants to have filed an applicationfor El11'C3i:If1:€11't of 'a site in terms of the Authority {incentive Scheme of Land] Rules. 1989, (i'ot= rejected by order 1" respondent, has resu-ltteidpvin the order and to issue pciiirecting the respondents to aliot a to the petitioiier.
the petitioner did not. in response ,,..1;,o'~"fthe"~ti'o,tice~under Section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act; vc-itintarily surrender possession of the land. to the Deptity Commissioner. when acquired under Act on of the Authority, free from any objection 7what;s()eve1' muchless object to the vesting of the land in the Authority. Thus, the petitioner does not fall within ;§;4\ x it " rej.ec%t.eEd} ~ the ambit of "Voluntary surrender". for allotment' K under the Rules. The condition under R1H11eA"8_[i"j:fofV Rules having not been comp1ied[Awith4Tiiofthet'giietieftioher since there was no Vo1unt.a1y_. surrerider the lands acquired, petitioner to_ ariy that View of the matter, to the reasons, findings at by the 1&1 responderitx rejecting the a free site under the Ru1es.h*--._A ' t V iv'-i'he fiIr1'it 'pet.iti'ohh'.being T1'1€I'iT.l€SS, is accordingly 3&5;
Euégé