Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Basavva W/O Padadayya Math vs The Special Land Acquisition Officer on 29 February, 2024

                                                    -1-
                                                          NC: 2024:KHC-D:4695
                                                           WP No. 108286 of 2014




                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                                          DHARWAD BENCH
                             DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
                                                BEFORE
                                    THE HON'BLE JUSTICE M.G.UMA
                             WRIT PETITION NO. 108286 OF 2014 (LA-RES)
                      BETWEEN:

                      1.   SMT.BASAVVA W/O PADADAYYA MATH
                           AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS.

                      2.   SRI BASAYYA S/O. VEERABHADRAYYA MATH
                           AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.

                           ALL AT CHIKKAHOLDUR,
                           TQ: BILAGI DIST: BAGALKOT.
                                                                    ...PETITIONERS
                      (BY SRI BASAVARAJ GODACHI, ADV. (ABSENT)

                      AND:

                      1.   THE ADDL. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
                           U.K.P., BAGALKOT, DIST: BAGALKOT.

                      2.   THE COMMISSIONER FOR
                           UPPER KRISHNA PROJECT,
         Digitally
         signed by
                           NAVANAGAR, BAGALAKOTE,
         MANJANNA
MANJANNA E                 DISTRICT: BAGALAKOTE.
E        Date:
         2024.03.04
         11:34:03
         +0530
                      3.  THE GENERAL MANAGER
                          REHABILITATION AND CONSTRUCTION
                          UPPER KRISHNA PROJECT, NAVANAGAR, BAGALAKOTE,
                          DISTRICT: BAGALAKOTE.
                                                                 ...RESPONDENTS
                      (NOTICE TO RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 3 : SERVED)

                           THIS WRIT PETITON IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE
                      CONSTITUION OF INDIA PRAYING THIS COURT TO QUASH THE
                      ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT THE ADDL.SPECIAL
                      LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, UPPER KRISHNA PROJECT, BAGALKOT,
                      DATED 28.04.2014 BARING NO.HEVIBHUSWA/NYAPRA: W.P.NO.
                      83687-83688-83689-83690/2012/162      (ANNEXURE-K)      AS
                                    -2-
                                            NC: 2024:KHC-D:4695
                                             WP No. 108286 of 2014




ARBITRARY, UN-REASONABLE AND OPPOSED TO LAW AND DIRECT
THE RESPONDENTS TO PAY THE COMPENSATION IN RESPECT OF
PHOT KHARAB (A) LAND OF THE PETITIONERS MEASURING
SY.NO.176/1 AND 176/2 MEASURING 1 ACRE 30 GUNTAS AND 4
ACRES 00 GUNTAS RESPECTIVELY SITUATED AT CHIKKAHOLDUR
VILLAGE OF BAGALKOT TALUKA BAGALKOT DISTRICT AND SUCH
OTHER RELEIFS.

    THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING 'B'
GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                               ORDER

Learned counsel is absent. No representation.

2. The order sheet dated 28.02.2024 reads as under:

"Proxy counsel for the petitioners prays for time. The order sheet dated 26.02.2024 reads as under:
"Learned AGA submits that the petitioners is claiming compensation for the karab(a) land, which was never granted in favour of petitioner prior to acquisition. Hence, the writ petition is not maintainable.
However, learned counsel for the petitioner is absent. No representation.
Finally, as a last chance, list this matter on 28.02.2024."

However, to afford an opportunity, as a last chance, list this matter on 29.02.2024." -3-

NC: 2024:KHC-D:4695 WP No. 108286 of 2014

3. In spite of that, there is no representation, even when the matter was passed over twice and again called at 4.00 p.m. This writ petition is of the year 2014. I do not find any reason to adjourn the matter. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed i.e, for non prosecution.

SD/-

JUDGE EM/CT: ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18