Karnataka High Court
Smt H S Jayamma vs The State Of Karnataka on 30 November, 2020
Author: S R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.49671 OF 2014(LA-RES)
BETWEEN:
SMT. H.S. JAYAMMA
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
W/O LATE M. RAMAIAH,
R/AT 6TH A CROSS,
PARK LINE ROAD, DEVIKRUPA,
MARUTHI NAGAR,
TUMKUR-572 101.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. B.S. NAGARAJ, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
M.S. BUILDING,
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDI,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
TUMKUR DISTRICT,
TUMKUR-572 101.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
CUM-SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
TIPTUR SUB-DIVISION, TIPTUR-572 201.
TUMKUR DISTRICT.-572 201.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. T.P. SRINIVAS, AGA)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION DATED 31.12.2013 WHICH WAS
PUBLISHED IN THE KARNATAKA GAZETTE DT.30.1.2014, IN SO
FAR AS SL.NO.4, 5, AND 10, NOTIFYING THE PETITIONER'S
2
LAND IN SY.NO.8/2 MEASURING 16 GTS OF WET LAND
SY.NO.8/3 MEASURING 16 GUNTAS OF WET LAND AND LAND IN
SY.NO.83/P2 MEASURING 20 GTS OF GARDEN LAND ACQUIRED
FOR THE PURPOSE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLY SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT, AT
ANN-A & ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO THE SAID
NOTIFICATION.
THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B'
GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
In this petition, petitioner seeks quashing of the impugned preliminary notification dated 31.12.2013 vide Annexure-A, issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short "the Act of 1894") in respect of the subject lands belonging to the petitioner bearing Sy.No.8/2 measuring 16 guntas, Sy.No.8/3 measuring 16 guntas and Sy.No.83/P2 measuring 20 guntas, all situated at Chikkanayakanahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Chikkanayakanahalli Taluk, Tumakuru District.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned AGA for the respondents and perused the material on record.
3. In addition to reiterating various contentions urged in the petition and referring to various documents produced 3 by the petitioner, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that having regard to the fact that no award in pursuant to the aforesaid Preliminary Notification dated 31.12.2013 issued under Section 4(1) of the Act of 1894 and Final Notification dated 01.08.2014 issued under Section 6(1) of the Act of 1894 has been passed so far, the entire acquisition proceedings stood lapsed under Section 25 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short "the RFCTLARR Act"). Alternatively, it is submitted that since no award has been passed so far even after expiry of two years from the date of issuance of final notification dated 01.08.2014 under Section 6(1) of the Act of 1894, the acquisition proceedings have lapsed under Section 11-A of the said Act of 1894. It is therefore submitted that the impugned acquisition proceedings in respect of the subject land of the petitioner deserves to be quashed.
4. Per contra, learned AGA while reiterating the contentions urged in the Statement of Objections, submits 4 that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
5. As rightly contended by learned counsel for the petitioner, having regard to the undisputed fact that no award in pursuant to the aforesaid Preliminary Notification dated 31.12.2013 issued under Section 4(1) of the Act of 1894 and Final Notification dated 01.08.2014 issued under Section 6(1) of the Act of 1894 has been passed so far, the entire acquisition proceedings stood lapsed under Section 25 of the RFCTLARR Act. Even otherwise, since no award has been passed so far even after expiry of two years from the date of issuance of final notification dated 01.08.2014 under Section 6(1) of the Act of 1894, the acquisition proceedings stood lapsed under Section 11-A of the said Act of 1894.
6. In the result, I pass the following:
i. The petition is allowed.
ii. The impugned acquisition proceedings pursuant to the Preliminary Notification dated 31.12.2013 and Final Notification dated 01.08.2014 are hereby quashed insofar as the subject land of the petitioner 5 in Sy.No.8/2 measuring 16 guntas, Sy.No.8/3 measuring 16 guntas and Sy.No.83/P2 measuring 20 guntas, all situated at Chikkanayakanahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Chikkanayakanahalli Taluk, Tumakuru District is concerned.
Sd/-
JUDGE Bmc