Karnataka High Court
Marenna S/O Yankanna Ors vs The Managing Director Ors on 16 January, 2012
Author: Ashok B.Hinchigeri
Bench: Ashok B.Hinchigeri
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA
DATED THIS THE 161H DAY OF JANLARY 2012
B EFO RE
HONBLE MR.JLSTICE ASHOK B. ITINCHIGERI
W.RNos.8315883161/20l0 C/W
WP.Nos8316283173/2010 AND
\V.P.Nos.83 195 53213/2010 (LARES)
IN W.P.Nos.83158-161/2010
BETWEEN:
1. Marenria S/o Yankanna
Age: 35 years
0cc: Agriculture
2. Tirupai S/o Sheshanna
Age: 32 years
0cc: Agriculture
3. Tirupati S/o Sriiuivas
Age: 53 years
0cc: Agriculture
--1. Rajkumar S/o Srinivas
Age: 38 years. 0cc: Agriculiure
5. Saibanna S/a Srinivas
Age: 32 years. Ore: Agriculture
6. Dasharath S/a Srinivas
Age: 38 years
0cc: Agriculture
7. Krishna 5/0 Srinlvas
Age: 47 years.
0cc: Agriculture
8. Saraswathl W/o Sheshanna
Age: 55 years. 0cc: Agriculture
9. Vlshwanathreddy
5/0 Namberma @ Nimbeppa Honnareddy
Age: 60 years. 0cc: Agriculture
Rio Chennur (K) village
Tq. Shahapur, Dist. Gulbarga
Petitioners 1 to 8 are
Rio Vanadurga, Tq. Shahapur
Dist. Gulbarga
Petitioners
(By Sri Ravi Path, Advocate)
AND:
1. The Managing Director
KBJNL, Kaverl Bhavan Annex
KG Road. Bangalore -02
2. Executive Engineer
0 & M Division, B. Gudi
Tq. Shahapur. Dist. Gulbarga
3. The Asst. Executive Engineer
0 & M Sub-Division -8
Vanadurga, Tq. Shahapur
Dist. Gulbarga
4. The Spl. Land Acquisition Officer
U.K.P (corrected as per order dtd. 8.2.20 1 1)
B.Gudl, Tq. Shahapur. Dist. Gulbarga
5. The Siae Of Karnataka
Rep. By Chief Secretary
Revenue Department. Bangalore
Responderns
(Sri Krupa Sagar Patil, Adv. for Ri to R3
Sri Shivakumar Tengli, AGA, for R.4)
These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 &
227 of the Constitution of India. praying to issue a writ
of mandamus, directing the respondents to initiate land
acquisition proceedings in respect of the lands
belonging to the petitioners more specifically described
in Annexure-B to the writ peltion and etc.
IN W.P. Nos.83162-173/2010
BETWEEN:
1. Malleshappa S/o Bhimaraya
Age: 40 years. 0cc: Agriculture
2. Shankrappa S/o Mallareddeppa
Age: 28 years. 0cc: Agriculture
3. Kareppa S/o Piddappa
Age: 35 years. 0cc: Agriculture
4. Shivappa S/o Siddappa
Age: 32 years, 0cc: A&triculturc
5. Kariyamma \V/o Kareppa
Age: 34 years. 0cc: Household
6,
Mahantava S/o Gurulingayya
Age: 33 years. 0cc: Agriculture
4
7. Vljaykumar 5/0 Govlndarao
Age: 40 years. 0cc: AgrIculture
8. Gururaj 5/0 Govlndrao
Age: 36 years. 0cc: AgrIculture
9. Shamrao Sb Gopalrao
Age: 38 years. 0cc: AgrIculture
10.Chandrakanth 5/0 Govlndrao
Age: 41 years. 0cc: AgrIculture
11 .Khandappa 5/0 Devldrappa Pujarl
Age: 43 years. 0cc: Agriculture
12.Devlndrappa Sb Karlyappa Pujari
Age: 45 years. 0cc: Agriculture
13.Khadar Patel Sb Syed Md. Patel
Age: 48 years, 0cc: Agriculture
I 4.Syed Patel S/o Saheb Patel
Age: 37 years. 0cc: Agriculture
l5.Leelavatl W/o Pralhadachari
Age: 36 years. 0cc: Household
16.Sharanappa S/o Ningappa Hangargi
Age: 42 years, 0cc: Agrlcukure
1 7.Basanna Sb Honnappa Bhavlmanl
Age: 33 years. 0cc: Agriculture
18.Sugamma W/o Basanna Bhavlmani
Age: 30 years. 0cc: Household
19.Mallanna Sb Basanna Bhavlmanl
Age: 20 years. 0cc: AgrIculture
5
20.Bhimareddy Sb Shivareddy Hosmani
Age: 41 years, 0cc: Agriculture
21 .Mahipalreddy Sf0 Shivareddy Hosmani
Age: 39 years. 0cc: AgrIculture
22.Chikka Vishwanath 5/0 Ayyappa
Age: 34 years. 0cc: Agriculture
23.Mallikaijun Sb Ningappa
Age: 38 years. 0cc: Agriculture
24.Shrishail Sb Ningappa
Age: 43 years, 0cc: Agriculture
25.Siddamma Wf 0 MallikarJun Arkeri
Age: 26 years, 0cc: Household
All are R/o Budanoor
Tq. Shahapur, Dist. Yadgir
Petitioners
(By Sri R. S. Sidhapurkar, Advocate)
AND:
1. The Managing Director
KBJNL. Kaveri Bhavan Annex
KG Road, Bangalore -02
2. Executive Engineer
0 & M Division. B. Gudi
Tq. Shahapur. Dist. Yadgir
3. The Asst. Executive Engineer
0 & M Sub-Division -9
Malagatu, Tq. Shorapur
Dist. Yadgir
6
4. The Spl. Land Acquisition Officer
U.K.P (corrected as per order dtd. 8.2.2011)
B.Gudi. Tq. Shahapur. Dist. Yadgir
5. The Stale of Karnataka
Rep. By Chief Secretary
Revenue Department. Bam,a1ore
Respondents
(Sri Krupa Sagar Patil, Adv. for Ri to R3
Sri Shivakumar Tengli, AGA, for R.4)
These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 &
227 of the Constitution of India. pravinu to issue a writ
of mandamus. directing the respondents to initiate land
acquisition proceedings in respect of the lands
belonging to the petitioners more specilicallv described
in Annexurc-B to the writ petition and etc.
IN W.P.Nos.83195-213/2010
BETWEEN:
1. Malkappa S/o Shankrappa
Age: 55 years. 0cc: Agriculture
2. Siddanna S/o Shankrappa
Age: 45 years. 0cc: Agriculture
3. Shankrappa S/o Siddanna
Age: 34 years. 0cc: Agriculture
4. Basappa S/o Laxman Ujjal
Age: --10 years. 0cc: Airiculture
7
5. Amalappa Sb Seetaramappa
Age: 38 years. 0cc: AgrIculture
6. MalllkarJun 5/0 Basavya
Age: 38 years, 0cc: Agriculture
7. Bhlmappa Sf0 Seetaramappa
Age: 48 years, 0cc: AgrIculture
8. Nagappa Sf0 Basayya
Age: 43 years. 0cc: Agriculture
9. Amalappa Sb Seetararnappa
Age: 38 years. 0cc: Agriculture
1O.Basappa 5/0 Lachnianna
Age: 37 years, 0cc: Agriculture
1 1.Md. Abdul Sfo Md. Yusuf
Age: 48 years. 0cc: Agrlcukure
12.Md. Abdul Jabbar S/o Shalk Mahiboobsab
Age: 46 years, 0cc: Agriculture
13.Chandrashekar Sfo Sheshanna
Age: 34 years, 0cc: Agriculture
14.Tlrupatl 5/ o Sheshanna
Age: 32 years. 0cc: AgrIculture
15.Rangappa S/o Sheshanna
Age: 47 years, 0cc: Agriculture
16.Md. Yusuf Sfo Shalk Mahiboobsab
Age: 42 years, 0cc: AgrIculture
l7.Md. Abdul Khadlr 5/0 Abdul Wahid
Age: 48 years. 0cc: Agriculture
8
18.Md. Hussaini Sb Abdul Wahid
Age: 43 years, 0cc: AgrIculture
19.lrappa 5/0 Sharanappa
Age: 48 years. 0cc: Agriculture
20.Parasuram 5/0 Hanmantarava
Age: 39 years. 0cc: AgrIculture
21.Gouranima V/o Siddappa Hawaldar
Age: 49 years. 0cc: Household
22.Gouramma W/o Siddappa Hawaldar
Age: 49 years, 0cc: AgrIculture
23.'flppayya 5/0 Tayanna
Age: 56 years, 0cc: Agriculture
24.Ramayya Sb Tayanna
Age: 52 years, 0cc: AgrIculture
25.Laxrnavya Sf0 Tayanna
Age: 49 years. 0cc: AgrIculture
26.Barathraj Sb Tavanna
Age: 43 years. 0cc: Agriculture
27.Hanmayya Sb Tayanna
Age: 47 years. 0cc: Agrlcukure
28.Mahlboobsab Sb Md. Haneef
Age: 38 years, 0cc: AgrIculture
AU R/o Vanadurga
Tq. Shahapur, Dist. Qulbarga
Petitioners
(By Sri R. S. Sidhapurkar, Advocate)
9
AND:
1. The Managing Director
KBJNL Kaveri Bhavan Annex
KG Road. Bangalore -02
2. Executive Engineer
O & M Division, B. Gudi
Tq. Shahapur. 1)1st. Gulbarga
3. The Asst. Executive Engineer
O & M Sub-DIvision -8
Vanadurga. Tq. Shahapur
Dist. Gulbarga
4. The Spl. Land Acquisition Officer
U.K.P (corrected as per order dtd. 8.2.2011)
B.Gudl. Tq. Shahapur. 1)1st. Gulbarga
5. The State of Karnataka
Rep. By Chief Secretary
Revenue Department. Bangalore
.Respondents
(Sri Krupa Sagar Path, Mv. for Ri to R3
Sri Shivakumar Tengli, AGA, for R.4)
These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 &
227 of the Constitution of India, praying to Issue a writ
of mandamus. directing the respondents to initiate land
acquisition proceedings In respect of the lands
belonging to the petitioners more specifically described
In Annexure-B to the writ petition and etc.
These Writ Petitions coming on for preliminary
hearing B' group this day, the court made the following:
I ()
ORDER
Sri Krupa Sagar Patil, the learned counsel, who appears for the respondent \os.2 and 3 takes notice for the respondent \o. I also.
2. These petitions are clubbed, heard together and arc being disposed of by this common order, as the questions of fact and law involved in all the three hatches of the petitions are the same.
3. The grievance of the petitionersis that their lands are occupied for the purpose of construction of C.D. drain and lead channel (Upper Krishna Irrigation Project). But occupying the petitioners' lands by the respondent authorities has been without paving any compensation to them and without initiatint the acquisition proceediflUs.
4. Sri Ravi Patil, the learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P. Nos.83 1 58-83 161/2010 submits a 11 that In the earlier round of writ petition (W.P. No.80454/2009 and other connected petitions), the directions are already issued for carrying out the necessary survey for identifying the petitioners' lands, which are already submerged due to the implementation of the irrigation project.
5. Sri R.S. Sidhapurkar, the learned counsel for the petitioners In W.P. Nos.83162-83172/2010 and W.P. Nos.83195-832l3/2010 submits that it is not in dispute that the respondent authorities have already utilized the petitioners' said lands for the Irrigation project. The petitioners' umpteen number of representations for the disbursement of the compensation amount has not evoked any response from them.
6. The learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 submits that they are the formal parties and that it is for the Government to take a call on the issue.
"Sit 12 He further submits that the Krishna Bhagya Jab Nigam Limited has already written to the Land Acquisition Officer seeking the particulars of the disbursement of the compensation amount.
7. The petitioners have sought a writ of mandamus to the Government to initiate and conclude the acquisition proceedings. I am afraid, such a direction cannot be given in exercise of the power conferred by Article 226 of the Constitution of India, because the compulsory acquisition of lands falls within the eminent domain of the State. This Court would not give any direction either to acquire or not to acquire any land compulsorily.
8. It is trite position in law that if the private properties are acquired. the owner has to be compensated therefor. It Is therefore necessary to direct the Special Land Acquisition Officer to take the assistance of the Survey Department. hold the joint Awl.
13S. survey in the presence of the petitioners and the officers of Krishna Bhagya Jala Nigam Limited and thereafter ascertain whether the petitioners' lands are utilized. If the possession of those properties is taken, then the Government/any of its designated officers like the Deputy Commissioner shall determine the compensation payable and pass the order thereof and disburse the compensation amount. If the possession of the petitioners' lands In question continues to be with the petitioners, that is, if their possession is not taken by the Government for any public purpose, then the question of giving the compensation to the petitioners would not arise. The Government or any of its authorized officers shall pass the necessary order in this regard within six months from the date of the issuance of the certified copy of today's order.
9. If the petitioners are not content with the determination of the compensation amounts, it is open ARM 14 I to them to seek just compensation by filing the suit. Further, if the Government/Its authorized officers pass the order and Issue the endorsement that the petitioner& lands are not utilized by the Government for any public purpose, It shall be open to the petitioners to challenge the same by way of filing the suit.
10. Alternatively, on ascertaining that the petitioners' lands are utilized for the Irrigation project In question, the respondent No.4 has to submit the proposal to the Government for the compulsory acquisition of the lands. If the Government accepts this proposal, It has to Initiate and complete the acquisition proceedings within six months from the date of the issuance of the certified copy of todays order.
11. Needless to observe that if the petitioners are not satisfied with the award to be passed by the Government, if It resorts to the compulsory acquisition of the lands. it Is always open to them to seek the ARM 15 enhancement of the market value of their acquired lands i ivokirig Section 1 8 of the Land Acquisition Act.
12. One of the two alternative courses chreci ed herein shall be completed by the Government within six months from the dale of the issuance of the certified copy of todavs order.
13. These petitions are aecorchiiiglv disposed of. No order as to costs.
Sd/ 3UDGE LG