Karnataka High Court
Electronics And Radar Development vs B N Hanuma Reddy on 7 June, 2011
Bench: Manjula Chellur, S.N.Satyanarayana
Kfx
Sri E Iéiriprasad, Adv. J
.1_. E%.N,Hanuma Redéy
-3-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY é1é*'JUN}:.,e2a.12. "
PRESENT' " »""«
THE: HQNBLE MRs.JUsi*I€§E; MANJULA *CHi§;LLUR
THE HON'BLE MR.};rUsT1Cj:..LS'.~:x1;$ATyANARAYANA
WRIT APPEAL NQs..511.7d}{2:§0s;'~8§ '318Q7*-819 /2010
BETWEEN:
1.Eleetronies afid .Ra,dar1 Development ' gabli-shnient _[I ;RDE), Represented. it Chief' ~ AdeIhii1i's_txf:;1.tiVe:fi-Offibef;- H Géyvernmem of India_,'-___ . ' Ministry of _DefenCe., V " __ Defeime Rese.arch' gfid Development Organization, DRDOLC':0mp1ex, CV'Raman Nagar Post, Bangalore'-.5 560 093.
Umgn Qf India... .....
' * .. _Re_p1*es--en'ted by its Under Secretary, V' V _ VEvfi:ii.:§t1=y' of Defence, ',Nefi»meun;' ,..Appe11ants S/0 Nanjappa Aged about 42 years No.9; Byrasandra Village, C.V.Raman Nagar Post, Bangalore ~ 560 093.
«l\Jw\% . Murthy . B.M.Har1umappa Reddy, S/0 Late Nagappa Major, No.8, Byrasandra Village, C.V.Raman Nagar Post, A 'l Bangalore --~ 560 093.
. Ssridhar S/0 M.Krishr1appa Aged about 42 years, No.2, 13¢ Main Roach _ _ New Byappanahalli Exterlsiaxig Bangalore --- 560 088; _ V S/0 Narzfihirriaprpa ..
Aged abou'?,j36'-years-;_V'--«--._ No. 1 1, sud.dagun'r.apa1ya ._ liilllageg, C.V;Ram_an Nagar Post, Bangalore' v~ .
. Muniyailappa W S / 0 Mi;niswan1,appa V .
Aged about 35 years, » 'E§'§EOi2'2$ Suddaggqntapalya Village, . V""*C'.VI'I?.arn.€;1r1 Nagéf Post, V ' » _Bar;galere'* .--__ 560 093.
" V'enl:ateéh _
-- A H *S'/ 0VP:iIpar1rla »._Major, _l\E's3ar Paparlaili building, Suddagixntapalya Village, C.V{Raman Nagar Pest, V " * rfiangalore --~ 560 098. I 'fllfianjappa S/0 Late Totlappa, Major, Abayyappa Layout, Sudclaguntapalya Village, CA/'.Ramar: Nagar Post, Bangalere «~ 560 093.
8. l0.
11. Nfadmaraju, S / 0 Narasiyappa Aged about 42 years, No.73, Sucldaguntapalya Village, _ C.V.Rarnan Nagar Post, i H Bangalore »~ 560 093. ' A.Krishr1aswarny S/0 Annappa Gowda, Major, No.90, Sudd'ag_untapalfy'a _'v"illage, C5V.Raman Nagar P'esi,., '' 'V' . Bangalore »~ 560 093.
G. Ramal;..rish_na S/0 Laite C;éangap.pa3 "
Ager1"abQ_1iE.. H » No.24, S_Ligidag:,1nta~palya--Village, VVC;-V._R"arnar: ::l_\I.agar Pest,' --- . . Bangaldre ~45.6O'0"£)_3. - 'S.Dan10dafa,,,ll \ _ ' S/V0 'B.Sathya'narayar; Aged about _3.3.year_s3, No.3,
-- .VSuddag;ur1tapa1ya Village, C ;V.Raman Nagar Post, V Bangalore QSESO O93.
' T. I:i_A1?j2zf1appa « "S/V Late' 'Kalappa Ageflabout 50 years, No.35, Suddaguntapalya Village, * VCA.iV.Raman Nagar Post, Bangalore --~ 560 093.
la K. Raja : S,/0 Karma C./0 BEML Sunder. Major, Suddaguntapalya Village. C,\?.Ramar: Nagar Post? Kg; Bangalore ~«~ 580 093. 7 l\l.Sathish S/0 S.Nagaraja ~ Major, Near Pojamrna Tempibe, No.1? Suddaguntapalya Vill"age;._ "
C.V.Raman Nagar Post; _4 Bangalore ~ 560 093. . l
14. ' (By Sri H.R.Ahanthakrishna Assts;§._A€ix's., for R5, R10 8: R11 g ' .. .
These WAS are flleclfof the"--K_a.rriataka High Court Act praying to set asides-the'Vorderppasseél* -in the writ petition No.69?" 8 / 2006 {§l'_v'I-RES) §d.ated,V "ll/_'.f_)u2'/i2.fOO8. These Jeporniiriglh "on further orders this day, Manjula ClTl_€Hll1';';gJ, delivered._ the following:
The i'espor_1der1--ts"hereih approached the learned single judge.ghalleriglr1g.v'the*deelaration made by the appellants in l V. ppiirsu5a"12.oe'.of Seotiorr3 of the Works of Defence Act, 1903, published in gazette on 9.7.2005, wherein eertainv. restrictions came to be imposed on the use and enjo3im_e11t of the land in the vicinity of Electronics and iRa.€i"ar Development Establishment at C.V.Raman Nagar, Barigalore (LRDE).
-5- Constitution as there is unreasonable restriction...i.Ii» their properties and having title over the are not allowed to make use of th6:'f)urep'erti'es in _h.est"wa"§:
possible, the authorities have t0?_aec;_uire the 'pr'0p'erties;«.. belonging to them and caniiot imposee_"_=uri:feasonable restrictiens as specified in thel'ri0'tifrcatLQn.
4. So as ithgv. -- regard to the notification.-bleingtisisuveel it was held against__t__he helix/ever the Writ petitioners having_ha_d-- "order in their favour are not before us. st; 'ifariiasllrestrictien on the user of the pregerties, th'e..e_lgearne'c1 single judge after referring to the d€¢'lSl.O;ll:A'Ofi:tAl1€ Apex Court in the matter of Chairman, lndore =~VS~ Pure lnciustrial Coke 8.: Chemicals Ltci~..., (2_{.}O?7:}:8ASCC 1705 rightly held that though the right to propertjgseeases to be fundamental right, but it has become a it geonstirtutienal right and even a human right as one of the ' V. ..._::§1ain necessities of any human being right to reside in a place and enjey the property held by him is affected by virtue ef the netitieatien, He alse refers to the judgment in the -7- matter of Ramniklal l\l.Bhutta and another__*¥i/set' Maharashtra and Ors., AIR 1997 l236;in'= .
that restrictions imposed without=.A_pay-ingf? any' coinpei'is_ati;s:1 is unfair and Courts though.»as7e_ notentitlecl t,o"inte_rfer§§: with V' ; the notification as such, belfito vvelo justice having regard to the ~
5. The:..le*a.rr_1ed §single...'jud:§efiiltiiriately held that the '-
proVisionsi'contairieof 3.:_of the 1903 Act as valid but "'apPl3113flt allthmity 'iithef '$0 makeVv:'e_ornpulvs:o1§f'* "of lands situated within the vicinity 'its or pay to the petitioners reas--onabl,e compensation for imposing restrictions on the » t1S»€vand'€I1jQ'j/'II_1€flt of their property in accordance with law. 'Aceording to the learned Counsel fer appellants, this lciirection would result in unreasonable financial prelssure on the appellants' establishment and it cernpeis them to acquire the properties though they are not in need of the lands in question for their establishment. h I1«;'*// H A: figfife
-9.
some cempensatton or there has to be'.4"."eompziis30fy acquisition of land by the appel1ants"'uI1it. h
8. Having regard to <thea faeta hand 1€Vj'ii"<A::jt:.r)v:1_"sta,'31°1c:es._t; nothing more could have ftheficourts in order to see the ends ..theet. Eh that View of the matter, we are of trim. of the grounds raised by into consideration and site hmain appeals, M1'sc.CV1.. petitions do not --.£;ir «consideration. 33:1 "' E§h@E