Karnataka High Court
Sri Ramachandra Kamath vs State Of Karnataka on 11 March, 2008
Author: Ashok B.Hinchigeri
Bench: Ashok B.Hinchigeri
in THE H-IGHT-COURT;-OF»-IGKRNATAKAAT %
DATED nus THE' 1 1111 DAY V A T '
THE 'rh'.'u'€'B'1".E' MR. JUSFICE A3HG:'{'B. Hifiaglfigagi-".
warr PEl'I*I"iON' No. A
BETWEEN
1
SR1 RAMACHANDRA
gasp AL'-QUT'ZOYEARS.__ .
s/o LATE.PA-EMANABHA--KAMATH-VL'-,_ % ~
SHIRIBE§3I3I3v,__UDIjP'["57f!i_1'0}
sm Tsasznnzmu %%
AGED s..r_<;%o'..I*1%'
s/o:PAPANNA. - '
saoeufiimv:-.s:.«" j
III) I'll I
BANNAJE, UDUPI
SR! K RAi§{A£3HfixI€:DRA'Efi;lAT-
sf'-EEEE' =%B@L"§"'®'YEA1?S-- .
=3/:0 M'r%:r. K. GOFREBHNPA
é . R,'A'P'# opp. "'.'-IE3" mm-
MII IIEI'-RI I
' - 'AMBA1;a~.?Ao3t_PosT, BA-NNAJE
-In
SKI K3". 1
_ % ;€'HURaM:--BEAT %
s,*o> 'TE I_{_99PALBHA'I'.-'
AGEED fiEGu'1' as '!""'u;tu<' ""3
" = : R/?A'l'"#2s3-26,.OPP. HEERA anon
V' "'UDUPI'-"576 101
I51 Infill 'I'VE
Ki'11"BAiA?fi'fi'i' FG3'i",'un1_wI:w-1::
sax K auauxw -BHAT
Sit') -
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
R/A #2.-3-.-26, 017?. Hi?-:I_:31"t:(_iH:... ' -
AMBALAPADY P081'. Baumm , %
._..,
. 'M.
1-:
4|
1o A4
A 'S10-1_.ATE~N'RR_VA POOJARI
.,,«_c;:_.:_.u_.3% ABQUF mues
UDUPI-57 6 101
SMT SUSHEELA NAYAK
rs In run: 'lI"l'I.I nu-run unwary
lJ[U I"£"llV UIV.'il.'\.'I'l IIfllfl'l\
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
iViE1'1':'<' KAREATAKA Biniviii
SI-IIRIBEEDU
UDUPE-5'76 101
SMT' APP: GUJRAN
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
W/"O MADHAVA GUJARAN «
NEAR cm BUS srmn ,
UDUPI576 101 ' ' '
SR1 ANANDA JATHANNA " " -- If V
AGED ABOUT 53YEAR8 :; »
# 10-4-M"
Am
cm BUS '
UDUPf5?61'0l "
sM'rvvVU--Ava.mV.s-H-Ma: BHAGWATH
AGED=AB'0U'l" mans' -
w_/0 LATE RAViND'RA=KAM~A'PH
NEAR cm BUSVSTAI-*;1DA'*"
u:;;>uP1576 10.;
SR': Ki§usi>mA N gum
. 'HEAR' ctr? 'Bus smun
A UDLIP! .5?€:Z§ 101
gm Si:!AKIJ.h!rH.A.!.A. Baa»: % I
.. ,Ac.m:> ABOUT 45 YEA s
we gonna; nnnmnyz
Lea an autumn
" NEAR cm BUS STAND
in?
V 'rut:-In
UH 9: 57-5101
T s==::z.I3z4.u.I...umuur..27n we
HUI MI I\lI III III' II
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
S,' O MOHAPPA DYAVER
SHIRIBEEDU, UDUP! 576 101
p"
13
fit
J;
16
A1*<zD .; &
L ' STATE .015-KARNATAKA
<3: "
SMT SADANANDA SH-ENOY
S/0 'u'%TE VE %'PE%H S}--;'E%':'
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
an .1 cu nun ntnun .r n I'I'\l'\f'!I3
wa--r-un, urr nn:uufi"vz'u1 uuuun
NEAR SHANIQRANARAYANA 'l'EMPLE' é %
UDUF-"1-57'6 mi «
SR! KGuun""' "rowaai
s/0 uvrs: APFU POOJARI
AGED :'u'3OU'i" 75 'arms
SR1 K.i{'RiSi-iNA'RAJA SERALAE,
AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, " _ . ' _
s/o uvm K.~Lé$KSE-IM!NABM~'AN«8ARA.LAYjA,
KALSANKA, 576 10 1 »_ "
SRlTSS&.LIAN;f_ ._
s/o. mm SUBBA SWARNA
AGED ABOU'.i'.,68 *:EARs~.,
#8_3_ 133_ V M %
TM HAIR-DRESSNG SALOQN
KALSANKA; UDUPI'->516 101
* . pmmonnns
{av SI§I"P.s,...RMAGOPAL, snmon COUNSEL FOR
* SR! NATARAJA B.AL1.AL_. ADVOCATE)
t3*EPAR'l'M'Em' or REVENUE
VIDHANA scum;
_ [BANGALORE-560001
Ar-:5_:1z_:=_a\_v1'rsz_I1~1n1;112 s_=.I-:.c.sr_.--.- v
'V ' .!)Al."A.1PI.I'!'Y COMM!-S-S.0!\!ER
unup: DIS'I'RIC'l'
UDIJP1-576 101
L.A.!*!D A(.'-QU!S!'I'!0!*I OFFEGE'.-R
AND ASSTCOMMISSIONER
'x..a
KUNDAPURA SUB-DIVISION
KUNDKAPURA. UDUPI DISTRICI'
4 UDUPI CITY MUNICIPALITY
UDUPI, REPRESENTED BY ITS
COMMISSIONER. : '
[BY sm B.V.ACHARYA.c'ADVOCM_'E <3ENE'1i?Ai;_. cf:
FOR 3121
am PRASAD HEGDE',vVADV.FOR'l?-a4)' o
THIS wrerr PETITIONV is~..p1LE:oMoND.El§t'ARncLE"s AND 227
on THE r.:ows'r1'1*r.mo:~z on _!!".~'!j)!.1%' 1 PEA3'!.'9!G m QUASH THE
NOTIFICATION DT. 24.7.2007 ISSUED' BY ANNEXJL. AND B
.A.ur_> away: .A.!.-.!.- 00191.:-;.r-:g%;;I.I2'.-1*~.?I'I,..¢.t.1, 9..-en
THIS 'ulv'RIT;.PmTl'0N"C{}1'vfl}1'G AGE FOR ORDERS THEE D"1',
coum' MADE '1jHE"I«fQLLQwi:q§3;'--V.._ '- g V
....
The pefltioner -.o.15 files a _nr_I.-..I_n.o urea;
AH" ...."-g 1-*-=......'.n.-{of 123.5 to..'=.*.'i*.!'....-"*a=.'.'.' the .*--'umru";i11fi,'.3v, '- "3"'r:uisseii, as '" of petluoner 'p'.------.----_u Q} the learned (_3o__eelo:.a.nnr vino .9.- I 'III I-lluflllliivl § "i"'nere has been no fair and objective conaiiemtion of the objections filed by the petitioners. He brings to my notice, the specific objections raised by them and contained --in fl cu-'5 . n h'.b'.H. 7 'oeee,;.;:sap:;:«;m:e¥rs ' 1-.\ Annexures-D and D1. There has been no brings to my notice, t.h_ order, 'bf; ii' petitions where the 1% Land Acquisition Ae"t,V_fi the batch of cases, this View that the enquiry undeirf t Vh Act cannot be dispensgd the urgency clause was 'outiiiitis the concerned authorities 1:. -eon;tr1_'_r the objections and to hear them. Bevel.-L'pi:-;g_ the ta1tert;rr.a1.ive and parallel mad, namely, a 9 ~ 'Etzianipai-i5aif:eehto3,aka3:-r;u:' Road, whim" 1.. 1.. exis...nce. a_ _perVthe--intlex map. is more viabie anti cost-effective. seeks to draw support from the '1'-'i'on"oie Rufiupremei Court's judgment in the case of Bill! BRIG!-I ~ .a omens v. sure or Immum -MID omens. it 'reported (2001) 7 800 545. The relevant portion -of the said judgment is extracted hereinbelow:
'8.'I'hemainthmsto_f1heargurnentsadva:wedbythe learned counsel for the appellants in these appeals was HEM .1.u955}?._'.};}6, and other {IN thet the decision er the stete _ the prayer of the petitioners for of _ propertyfivrn acquisition is arbiaaw tutti l inasmuch as in the case of ottmers' if' other'.lttnds.t'lgttfi§g' within the area. ncttfiedrattlw _____ _....l_- ___. 4!. _ tti.éi'f ray I Inc? the ccepted ene_t_hej tm*t.'d,s acquisition The "for the qppellants structures. jt'tt-the out how lands tying eee % twee eétw have been prayer of the fifiet'lo.rits e.,.,. .V.V_,- ....u ..'... teamed counsel appeating for the State 'o_t'contetutect that the request of the V' V IzS;fifl A!' e.......... _, M. W their pmpetty fin; V Vlaiigtttisttton accepted since the construction on V' were either 'B' Class of 'C' Class eerewetene whereas the lands which were excluded aoqutsttton had 'A' Class consttuetion on them. '."'«'ugJpuLuu|g 193' was tcayu contention was aiso refutett by teamed' counsel "-"W'"'**" " "M Ms"-"t~etter-tts an the Q7'I.'7i57'l.l'al.J that re V' such pn'na'_nle was followed unlfonnly and some of the appellants had pucca structures having the quality of 'A' Class construction
10. Jooocx xttxxx HBH I'\_ JI...
U" W flaming. 111:4: .
Jcuza 9-Ii ' :1'. ("NJ LillI.dl£IIéIusul!"'.uu-tn: -9 -u_-. V r; we ._..»e;1..led_,f.nr_1m records, we are _ 7 appellants ' appellants for of % structures on them _.
"'cis0fui:'ic'e E -!¥Ae 4.3,? mg ;»:'er_:.r Illa! guéh is"
High .fai!ed:, ~--in wh-----=- it ishek'¢-that-*"uue-- % %ikk*:and«§;§nexlsfiobjecfions are to be consiieted-bcfbm-arriving at
- the property pmposed for aoquisitionehould . fie Th: objections cannot be disposed ofby statinge. *t!;.:at t'11..ey are technical. Sri P.S.Rajagopal also relied upon the irion""h'h- Supreme Court judgment in the case of oorolumon ~ yv. Immm ~enI1m.1., HBH V.£|Ld'_' 'that mvssiéan» Bench judgment of. reported 11112006) 7 sec 627 to hotness A that considering all the objections and to be eflbctivc; it cannot be an ' ; portions of the said judulcnt . "6.- ft is not in dispute o.;gofoo.Ao. _ confers a :ir:,:. qf it whose lands oo Honing 1{ mgard 1o zuo of "::-oL":r-.:'..+z&;o' o.....;.,o .-or its 4 .o"vis'h?A:"¢>f '59 anything the . some moo: be for a public-purpose. therefor mun!--be 'L:"A'9. 'I; is tho! to-a person must. % 3 one and' not a mere fovmality. o_ % ;o.ooom of opinion as regards the public as aha suitability olhemof must be a by of nimi as ragamis.
mnsideraiion of rfiféiiardfru-5:1:-5 aroo.'- re-*'_,o-a'£o-2: -qf :'r.n.e!.-n-a.rs! '!'.h.e in-its process must not commit any misdiredion in law: _ ItisaIsonotI'ndis;n1te!halSec:u'an»5-A ofthe-Act confers a vahxableoirnponatd-'fight- HEM regard to the provisions contained in k t ofthe Constitution it has been held to beqakinttfttt '20. 1'?! Act is r..z.-
Court in State of observed that in sud: a {me the ptotttttiotts ttf the statute as a person of [See also 1-up-gr:
"hub and (.149 1;. <9
z.~,'."-3,.-..."..n firnritfirl A I u?t,.vd cyan :1. 'J fj what does not amount to he read out the following pmagfaplia bf'. Bench judgment of the Hgifblc supteme cottrt in the case of -nu: BARIIIII % % M A t.-m.%.-. A..J.RA1lA mm amass. reported In " 3.12%.-$9.. '2 $591 _...I........ .. .......... ........} ......-. " runs r cums rt' twsuty you 't'afi . ---- ..---. .o.ri!y r_r_mt:aem_d amt tier deliberately and with care and it has been found necessary as a result of such thinking-to pass theorder. Tfwdictionwymoanillaqfthe wand 'consider' is 'to view attentively, to survey, LU .11.! 2 mt iaurhj, it": 366k. fife7iii"uw'y, to 'Pu w -n'_.~'l_ contemplate mentally, to think -over, give heed to, take note of; to iitini: ' _ _-__ ___...-u- .. ....n.. 3 ;...'.;.. leaug, 'I'u rulmiz' [vnauu l.X'I'F.Fi'i§"_'@V-Vfq1vVlVII-'.'l Permanent Edn: Vol. 8-}! think with acme. r: :°g aim 'consider' is tofix the uponwmh in to careful . ' ihI'r"u'C of ..}'i'». :73, €:'iuv-""u_:;m"-6, 9'-..r.a.-';a',f'es!..!.'I.IJ.! '1'-I' """
of the the obtain and.
in; in sine qua.
A If "'9 ofdéf '29 there -has been M-alrajizi L-
qir'-' inc rrru"'-uni w :6 :!-;<:._ %.r%-.c.=.,m§-'.=.s.=:'4i._2',' £3? r.n_n.¢.i :2 'the- In the the @ page-.
A ' mquiaite to the ti the " . _ be held to be non-existent. mmllmty Q!' what has -been above is that mind' has to be appliact "I¢Dl'fh regard to the necessity to obtain and examine all-the documents mentioned in the order. An appiioaiion of the mgani -in the r%si'€y :6 6:53am am.' cm--='.':'=~.-5 621.'; as: few ef- !.h..e m,n_n4,: in the under, HBH.
while there has been no sud:
%ci'er":f a':w'rFcr-zru-ze fir V !.h.-3 sm!s_:.ne; Aft; L. .
consideration of the .;:
necessity to obtar'ré; "
documents and an the Court would sing and wouid noi suEréfu'"fifie fir "'-it fl.
J 953 n-n'llu'Il!'fn "
I.1IC"".i'_V U." F V ' ' Iv obtain.'
1) The 3rd the anus' in queaiion are fg;-T?» and that the petitioners' ob]oc119' Fifi ' . Asflwduuhnu-x n is not in:fc>rt1A1ed'u'by ruaao' nia. satisfaction' ' can always be called _ '§z1io5»--q11ea1ion pmcwdings under Atflclc 226 of the ' India. In support of-submissions, he has 'A j,-_t1gmc_:I_1t_ of Hon'blc- Supreme Court in the EH3.-R.'.'!' 'Ea
-'H1.--TJ'il'ia§ -'fi1'I:'I"1'iaI'Ifir'fiai.ai. f "'ii 5% 3-3.. The relevant paragraph of the judgment is elmacwu' ' ' hcncinbclowz HEM.
"16. An executive action must be reason. An unfair ezaemtive survive for a pofenl' reason.» sustained Objedive sausgauiaausj anion. Even subjective of a State is h'ah5é'~.1p -- "'.S'taIe' I4- _ ____.nD. .2.
acting whether dsga "tannin" Ia! w.h.e:;:' 'the 3} Tm; last 'xiii '-"hat E5571?» m *......-"--T A..- 1. __ day-$ »(V1§u:-ii1g~ to -property was -hcifi -so -new aystcm of economy. 'T'hese_ . not~on!y= a constitutional and ' i also a human -right. In this mgard. he has .' A of the I-lon'bla Supmmccourt in the casevof IHDORI-4 ''- -='~V.*A''W§ :-
Thc ml.-.-ea.-.:t m:'*..'u1-2-.9-~s.r!'~ -flu.-3 'snid__= judgment are hen':inbe1r:"w*: I' u.'_'' I. right.
not only a oonsfimfional'-figw;-ha: also
54. '.NwDeeIaratwn'
-1 7. Sings the unlws public - _.
%%%% may we Hniveraal»,_ 1-9-rs ~
-in wezzgm in ~wI'th~others;- (ii) of individuals am to ma.' -to-.. ziuermooa, right to shelter etc but new human a _% nwfli)"aoeted- approach. Now . ___ __l' I__.....__.._ Rasa.'u::'.-m~' ' s*u.-.a..-" '.'.'-'-.......*'- J-.}_ aiso inoorporaied 9
-'-*-'-'W "M «'n---*-- , "am! JJIIGII uauuvuuu u £341 be read in -armsmmwe with :=-maiden: John Adams ii 7'97-isoijpui it'; t ' ~ t g; I e woperty is surely realash'befly.' 'The moment we-t society of God. and that twrtt«ae%jam¢of law pubiic 'tum " " .
...........{.....".'.,-v - . .. . uururwruas.' V . " K7 V56. to be a fundamental ye shall be deprived qf his _pn'qg.5ei1y:sctve'inaeooIdanoe. with law.' 'O 1 _._i2__..
» 1"-3_.V Advocate Generai. Sri B.v.'ehu:jra iepueu are required for the public 'purpoae~of'- H V' widening then: is traflic congestion on the narmw Malpe. ' Read; it has become an accident prone road.' He that the total number of-persons being the eemtpulsoly acquisition of lands is about 480-. out oi'-480 persona. persons have given their consent-to the acquisition. As a HBH.
matter offact, they have voluntarily surrendered of their lands to the respondents; Out of 16 (15th petifionm) has already y h
4. Sri Acharya further process for a stretch of 2.4 kins. thC'_ areas. which are in the If the- widening of the road in quoseoo is of alternative mad formation, of 18.34 acres. 1:
fin .l-Ian n-I-I-n-r '1'I';o-h."-'fir-emf 'i nInn1IimntI~--fim- acqu1red' h t or , the -itmds owooo' by the 15 pefltioncge' 'l"he- resistance is only from %zof"{he~~people being affected by the compulsony % L submits that in 90%-of the macs. ' " 'A'ifi:y"'quesfion,A':'oonsent awards' i.e. determination of market value % both to the landlosem and to the -Government; am- % He has also pmouood a sketch to show that the msismooo confined to some bits hem and thete. The learned -Advocate HBH.
General has relied on a judgment of the Hon'blc e _ the case of on I-Iuumau unenorrnnn v.-021133;? o-mam. reported In (1993) o»wce+1; e-mée ; n the said judgment is extracted he1einbeiaw "' A " T '30.
Shana' Bhushan. -the appellants -on the ground of .__not done so. awe: :.'-Age.-'---,V ;=.r.s.* .~.-,.--.:.=-;.-.*..--we ,ro»a§e is: Senior Counsel- nor f¢as£b:e_m_ wi¢h the -acquisition ofsuah. when the ooeupams of yimm qfvi§zé'~.r_£oqr.a}'red ianda have not though: it V ;,'-''s': :6 éi-':'a:.=,«';'.f:-rm 'u':'fie as-x':u-'as:'ta'u-it j.'rI'i'K-zwulvlyu Lu & . " v' eeeee 14 of mm qr mas M $ their grievwwe since more than six before the High Court this Court. The appelI¢m1a«'- main grievance " round the questions--=whether-ethoirlands l..........'......... ...li.........O. ...I......1.' ..........l..l_ I... ........,........'.....-...I ."..' all..- I' If llllfiyflll. (Ill.-lull' IJIIIIIJ WIFE" IN WW». .......I.'._._... '.4. .1 III Ivy}: f the Slate for lands. For such a mmenfiom qf course; -grievance oautd have been made under 'Section 5-A:'I1qpu'ry- , rfit was held. But that oouid M': I "JSH yeats had: before Section 6 natifitntion of day in 199?. Wow qfier a ......... 41...... ...'... ........... :4 ........ A ......a 1_..,__:.'.;...:i¢:Q;' 4., IIIUIG I'll-III 5h': W5, II IIFKJIIIIJ IE!' the * sole contention xthe proceedings in the the by Peflflliflmgi "1971 " 1.9 '09 39°''°'i 1 1- A .-_._,....-..... -.-l§£..YI; ...'.--....%'.1'..~;-.."-;_'~ _I.....:..: 1... 0'5 Inquiry I-UIIILJI-7 §'fII"lII'-I K '
--_'---.w--
6. me Bench I.I.i1g \.-can 'Ill. nnllluluilnrrll V0 Iranian! Ir: ' ea. - -me relevant I portion of' the extracted heminbciow:
__:*2g. cam in Om Pruleash -and - fipmiher v. Siaie of Uiiar Pradesh and oiiwrs; has em need not intetgfemeurith the x when only man» qf the land was- Vfiubjed to challenge. me Supvemeecourl-held-that it is neither advisable norfeasible-lo inlevfem with the aaguisiiion tfiarye trade of iamf--when the *-........,,m.'-'---'-H--'-.3...-:-* cf 9/1%" g flee %='re..¢.'- £9.-¢ have not mougmirfir to d:allen.ge- the--aagm'st'n'on HEM *u-7-. k " flan! unhgnm n.¢vnn'¢|'lI'nn in hnalinlnun, V W "M. IIJIIIIIISI W!" M "U M' proceedings and the-occqpants of oniy lands are agitating their grievance. In " case before us, out of 7 26 ganltaeitaf' u .n__ .___._._-.__-.5.-..... 1...- n.__-...:_ .1-:_...1' :.."......-'.'..;..,.4j-...s' '« uw ubquusiuun nus uutznmg JIl"l__.[I' cg,-7|. ruapuz my
-::.ere.s 10 gI_m.1a._s r_g,f!r.;_1u_=L angle, there is we "7: Consitiering the maéicat bar. the sustainability of the -to be examml 1 The statements of are produced -as Annexure D objections were raised. are not even xefermd to by the law relied upon by Sri p.s.Rajagop§1= contained under Section 5-1! of the Aces. mflm...-ve E SI 5"'! §t'\-I-IIu\l\IIuI _.__I__A A'-tenaiziiity Qreptherwiae of the abjeetiafls The 3-'=3 hoiding that the oiajectioras are unlaeruibie or considered. I am not proposing-or laying down- bosifion that however vague the objections -may be, to be considered. However. if a clear and specific cbjeetion is raised, it certainly merits sexious considemfion. It is HBH.
9-e 'W '-«fin-4*-Ht he-.2 m e,.v.9..="...'.*:-.2.-' thee in open to the decision-maker to accept or reject a only afier considering it. p
8. 'i"'ne oxiginai records the AGE.
and produced before me no contain of the beneficiary Department on nine bgifthehpetifioners. But the records do not eneneep en npeinenen of mind to show that the are nee ibficer has catefully and and the remarks thereto and the iéomtoentsi thereon in an objective manner. The 3rd Q'!-3"t.'|{:*.'."'.d'..e."!'V.V _?.i..fi.;r=.ifi2}? nee _«;n-.-fie:-A.... i indimnn.
4..." ,r___V' ".,.:;;_._:__n.:._.. -13 4|... 1 .. 1,.-- _..... _ $01 "|..l.l.C' 01 "I5 IHIIIIU Dy 11151513' it objections and by accepting the views in the matter. The Land ee¢,ni'iieen.s;ee, is an expmpriatory legislation. Its pmvisions V it are to strictly. as the person is being deprived of his H K Withotit consent.
But the question that arises for my consideration is whether the acquisition proceedings in question have to be quashed on account of the non-consideration of the petitioners' objections. r'1'.EH.
As held by the Apex Court. the power under exemised only in furtherance of interest of justice on the makm' u out of a legal point. xpc 'sruonx. A ; !-!e1_='b1e Suptezne Court's judgment in (of . 'fiz'i':'u"'i"i':'a 1':-HP: we fir. £5?-. V"-as-.-r-T"_!!.'5'.-;...?'V"5.i'.'.l"""'31'-T MID ornmna Wee hcreinbelowt fl w Our country is now __ambifians -pmgrwmne qf-all e m_u nd to make our ccwupetitibee in-thelworld market. -'-We are tiimciinvesimermi-in exdent. Ple -gr.-s,..--we 39- ms.-wie -.-..-e'.!.h ' We wish to-~aflaI'n the pace _ef:'p§i)gmss adtieued by some of me Asian z referred to as. 'Asian tigers'-, e.g.. Korea, Taiwan and singapam. n is. however, reoogrubeci on aii fine ""y"rasfrtirz"ure rue-m".-'rt-s.'3.-gie far e.".:.!-*.e-..':-'..':-.1,' 9. ,r;na.-ee e, pmg:'ese is our improvement, expansion and e These things very ofien call for : ' narulvnnnnf III:-if 1'1-n dnnnl at Ilaazan 4|n'n'.:|un '""""" "$5. I'D I'I"K§I III "U533 W :10, _Il'UI=i laglwplyu Courts. These are shape of writ pefifiorie'~«--gfiiad .--.. invariably, stag; efaa'1¢usui_ in some cases, 9?' injlmetion _....:I.. ..un._4;..... .5... ..'*~s..;_.L....' I......_ an. ..__ -1... .... Q L... ..
an: u|uufiruuuv.' 'wrwaI:us:rc'.1 rugy IIFEIUIF uuun was iezrger public -interest in I; power qf grunting under Article 226 is be e1aerased' only in .___.¢I_ fu*r'uw'j 'fiiiim-:"_ .+.,-7 Ia ref ;ua""""u'w" anti i'Ii'n'"fi'IInI:I""'§ t gm; ,;a,;._:.;:...g 9;: c.-,r:_n !e,r,zr.1_l- A1.n.4.! in me I of acquisition for public-pu-Ipaaaa,= the . of justice and the public r interest. They are very oftenone and the same; in «:1 cm Suit, grunting of-irgiundion or other 'I_._ __._I_.__ ___ '__I__'I_.. ._.l' oruers, more j7(7fi:uuny (y' mi :'!I.!e.r!:.-.r:-..1J.er,!,r n......nfim.e, is -.92;-.......mfl,,I,I '.l?I.ae courts have to weigh the public the private intenestr while exnemising the under Article 226 - indeed any of their discmetionarypowers. Itmayevenbyopentothe nT\|I n u ..
High Court to direct. in case it finds p the acquisition was uitiated on compliance-with some pm snau'"" :aasf"r:...be_; énmwa"""*"_ a lump sum or ._ or a..fl'omb'na a wrong; quasfdnq is not the oniy mas wit', «gs an .
:'r.':.':s%'}' pg: !.'-.3 it nor awiaable to these mime w__i!! in mind by the Courts whiie ij;r.:'ti:'--~..;:" n to acquisition _ Fnlnnanin ' V "WW . 'v.i_0. _ i*'*.:uti:i'ezf. it is for the Government anti not for Court widen the existing road or to -go in for the H fOIIIIIB1'i'0I1 road itself. In this regard. thcjudgmentofthe _ Court in the case V e jemV1cnn um omens reported in ma 1995 ac amen VA hertinbclow:
HRH V 'CW I. "4. ...'I'hough the argument may -be "
attractive, we cannot go into that .151-:33" -- M for the Government to take up cieeisioti '4 't' 'V for Court give any ' , J 7 I"-...n-Iusrnrnn-ni 413':-3 inl-n nnnlnn HLITQ '-J'-'I,T""'j". IJIII-Av W '3_IIJ'l'Iu I. ' true that the area jar;
purpose. It is not are establishing area .
for the firs! time." gma is already. Vonzmiarsmmiau. of.
the L"r.der t.'ae.:=e that there is any.
~ '
11. Advocate out--of V8.15 aegis of has become-finalein n:speetofe7.46 at the have w_»1un_t;n1,vt §lIJ.1\aI£!LlFu.FlaE1 ' fl';-I.I.Il.I.§. 5.1.711-II-I'-I I-I115 § fog?" pubiic purpose of widening the mad, Court " not the acquisition proceedings.
-. .;.;;..;.:...I :. .. ..............1..1..t ................. I '{DllC5.lI.ul.BIi3\.I. 111 G ICGHIJILBI-I.E o I The nfthig ms :4; be 3-. an api1ap*r§a*.e uuulz, may deciine to grant the lciief, even-if it' iaoitis-» U 'I' -I.J.J.,n_ impugned notification is bad. In taking this view. I by the decision of the apex Court in the case na.mn1-run um 0'11-[IRS h v. reported In 11996) 6 one 445. A said. iI.I.r.l.0mr=nt is .-_....t.-51 ~ :9. an.-.3 becomes void my But the action not be set at nm;gm=5n an war may be mid' as: me wi:!F:§n7.. is alwzge a ;....-'.'V_V."}|i__ .._..-3.... _-_.-__.22_1_;__-2 __ ' mw aw' unwr uwunacuaa of he in a reasonable manner.
has been conferred on me Gs-"art may in appropriate case decline io the relief; even {fit holds that the order . T"ru? iiei résifii is ihai exlmoml" "" "nary .f the C1_n.I_rt m.a_:,t .n.-:»! be smear-..i.-...-..~'! I. 3...». cI'rcumstanees. n is seen that the Vvhoquisition has become fina: and not only possessionlwdabeadybeentaiwnbmrafamnce A wasalsosoughtfor: theawardofflwcourlwtder 26 ihe was aiso n........mn,-.-14-J... '!!=..-2 L3,' !.h.-.3 @-,.-'-e!#....*-' %--.I .'-I..:...'' QB!-L also become final. Under those
-_ __ L.__..-_,_ L__.. '.as_.'. .
.
u1y'ILst:}'iedin-inle1feI1'ng mm .,,'=i notifiaztionunderse«:.=?az;_4a)"'ca;a&tIw V undersection 6.'
13. In the result. Needless to observe that the "f '. 1 d¢wrII11nmg- ' ' % the just market ii; iqaugaaifin and T gramim.an%-ta... statutory -are -not content-with--the ran nun: nu--u-'aw--pv two' « -15; As thewrit petitionia aismiaaed.L--m~o:aem~a.e%%mqui:u1 : te..,b;: passed on the implcading application filed on behalf 01? 13 'D': 1 n.D.n.
'I Smtsulochana Bhat, vwho claims to be owner of A' of which the fltioncr Nos. 15 and 16 are tenants. No order as to costs.
bvr