Karnataka High Court
Smt Puttamma vs State Of Karnataka on 1 August, 2022
-1-
WP NO. 52959 OF 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 01ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO. 52959 OF 2019 (LA-BDA)
BETWEEN:
SMT. PUTTAMMA
W/O LATE MUNITYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
R/AT NO.127/2, CHELLAGHATTA VILLAGE,
KUMBALAGUDU POST,
BENGALURU -560 060.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. BIPIN HEGDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT,
VIKASA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE COMMISSIONER
Digitally signed by BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
LAKSHMINARAYAN
N K.P. WEST EXTENSION,
Location: High Court
of Karnataka BENGALURU -560 020.
3. THE ADDITIONAL LAND ACQUISTION OFFICER
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHROITY
K.P. WEST EXTENSION,
BENGALURU -560 020.
-2-
WP NO. 52959 OF 2019
4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT,
K.G. RAOD,
BENGALURU - 560 009.
...RESPONDENT'S
(BY SRI. SHOWRI H.R., AGA FOR R1 AND R4;
SRI. K. KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER DATED 22ND DECEMBER, 2017 PASSED BY
RESPONDENT NO.4 VIDE ANNEXURE-F; DIRECT THE
RESPONDENT NO.3 TO IMPLEMENT THE CONSENT AWARD
PASSED ON 04TH NOVEMBER, 2019 IN LAND ACQUISITION
CASE NO.1264/2009-10 VIDE ANNEXURE-E; AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is giving up the prayer-A in the writ petition and sought for implementing the consent award dated 04th November, 2019 in Land Acquisition case No.1264/2009-10 vide Annexure-E.
2. Heard Sri. Bipin Hegde, learned counsel appearing for petitioner; Sri. Showri H.R., learned Additional Government Advocate for respondents 1 and 4; and Sri. K. Krishna, learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3. -3-
WP NO. 52959 OF 2019
3. It is the case of the petitioner that the land bearing Survey No.13 situate at Chellaghatta village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk having an extent of 6 acres was granted in favour of one Mudlaiah S/o Venkatappa in the year 1941. Pursuant to same, grant certificate was issued by the competent authority as per Annexure-A. It is further averred in the writ petition that the said Mudlaiah died leaving behind a Will in favour of Muniyappa-husband of the petitioner herein, having bequeathed the schedule property to an extent of 6 acres in Survey No.13 and the said legatee-Muniyappa died leaving behind his only surviving heir, the petitioner herein. It is also forthcoming from Annexure-B to the writ petition that the registered release deed dated 15th October, 2019 had been executed in favour of the petitioner herein.
4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent No.2 had notified the schedule land for the purpose of formation of "NADAPRABHU KEMPEGOWDA LAYOUT" and as such, the final notification was issued on 18th February, 2010, notifying the land belonging to the petitioner herein for acquisition, but the name of the petitioner was not reflected in preliminary or in the final notifications. Thereafter, the -4- WP NO. 52959 OF 2019 petitioner herein made a representation to the respondent- Bangalore Development Authority (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'BDA') to award compensation in respect of the land acquired which is belonging to the petitioner. The respondent-BDA had requested the revenue authorities regarding the title and genuineness of the petitioner's land. Thereafter, based on the reply made by the revenue authorities, respondent No.3 herein has passed the draft consent award dated 04th November, 2019 (Annexure-E) in favour of the petitioner and the same was confirmed by issuing the consent award vide Annexure-G. It is also the grievance of the petitioner that, in view of the issuance of consent award as per Annexure-G and the petitioner being the owner of the land in question, she is entitled for award in terms of consent award produced at Annexure-G. Hence, Sri. Bipin Hegde, learned counsel appearing for petitioner contended that the respondent-BDA be directed to implement the consent award mentioned above by awarding just compensation to the petitioner herein.
5. The petition was contested by respondent-BDA by filing the statement of objections and thereafter the petitioner -5- WP NO. 52959 OF 2019 herein filed rejoinder enclosing the copy of consent award as per Annexure-G. The said fact of passing consent award was not disputed by the respondents.
6. In the light of submission made by learned counsel appearing for parties, since the respondent-BDA had sought for report from the Tahasildar, Bengaluru South Taluk relating to the genuineness of the grant made by the Government in favour of Mudlaiah and the said aspect has been reflected in the paragraph 4 of the consent award, I am of the view that, there is no impediment for the respondent-BDA to implement the consent award dated 04th November, 2019 in favour of the petitioner by awarding compensation as stated in the consent award produced at Annexure-G, at the earliest, and in any event, not later than six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. With these observation, writ petition stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE ARK