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

Smt K Ambika Patil vs The National Highway Authority Of India on 20 September, 2023

Author: M.G.S. Kamal

Bench: M.G.S. Kamal

                                                  -1-
                                                            NC: 2023:KHC:34017
                                                          WP No. 16044 of 2022




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                         DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

                                               BEFORE

                             THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

                          WRIT PETITION NO. 16044 OF 2022 (LA-RES)

                   BETWEEN:


                   1.    SMT K AMBIKA PATIL
                         AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
                         W/O LATE SHIVAKUAMR PATIL
                         NO. 5655, I MAIN 2ND STAGE
                         VIJAYANAGARA
                         MYSORE 570017

                   2.    SMT. DANASHEELA
                         AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
                         W/O A.R. JAYAPRAKASH PATIL
                         NO. 5655, I MAIN , 2ND STAGE
                         VIJAYANAGARA
                         MYSORE 570017
                                                                   ...PETITIONERS
                   (BY SRI. KALLESHAPPA K S., ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed
by SUMA B N
Location: High
Court of           AND:
Karnataka


                   1.    THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA
                         OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL
                         LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
                         AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY
                         NATIONAL HIGH -275
                         (NTSIRE-MADIKERI DIVISION)
                         NO. 984, I FLOOR, GEETHA ROAD,
                         CHAMARAJAPURAM, MSYORE 570005
                         REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL LAND
                         ACQUISITION OFFICER AND
                         COMPETENT AUTHORITY
                                -2-
                                                NC: 2023:KHC:34017
                                          WP No. 16044 of 2022




2.   GRAM PANCHAYAT
     GUNGRALACHATRA GRAM PANCHAYAT
     MYSORE TALUK
     MYSORE DISTRICT
     BY ITS PANCHAYAT
     DEVELOPMENT OFFICER 570 021

3.   TALUK PANCHAYAT
     MYSORE TALUK
     BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER 550 005

4.   ZILLA PANCHAYAT
     MYSORE DISTRICT
     BYITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 570 002

5.   JOINT DIRECTOR
     TOWN PLANNING
     MYSORE 570 001
                                                    ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI HANUMANTHA REDDY G, ADVOCATE FOR R1
    SRI B J SOMAYAJI, ADVOCATE FOR R4
    R2, R3, R5 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)


     THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT
BEARING NO.LAO/NH/2022-23/648 DTD 7.7.2022 ISSUED BY R1 AS
PER ANNEXURE-L AND ETC.

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

                             ORDER

Counsel for the petitioners is present.

2. None appears for the respondents.

-3-

NC: 2023:KHC:34017 WP No. 16044 of 2022

3. Petitioners are before this Court seeking direction to the respondent - National Highway Authority to issue No Objection Certificate enabling the petitioners to seek issue of modified layout plan. The said situation has necessitated in view of the fact that the petitioners were earlier issued with a layout plan on 25.8.2015 by the Town Planning Authority. Subsequently, on 3.12.2020 the first respondent sought to acquire a portion of the land belonging to the petitioners. In view of the acquisition of a portion of the land belonging to the petitioners, the petitioners made an application for issuance of a revised layout plan. In response thereof, the endorsement at Annexure-K was issued stating that since the land has already been acquired, a revised plan cannot be issued. This constrained the petitioners to approach the respondent - National Highway Authority seeking No Objection Certificate for consideration of their request for modification of the layout plan. A similar endorsement has been issued by the National Highway Authority at Annexure-L, which reads as under:

"F PɼÀPÀAqÀAvÉ F ªÀÄÆ®PÀ w½AiÀÄ¥Àr¸ÀĪÀÅzÉ£ÉAzÀgÉÃ, ¢£ÁAPÀ 21.10.2021 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 21.11.2021gÀ ¤ªÀÄä Cfð C£ÀĸÀj¹ ¢£ÁAPÀ -06.04.2022gÀAzÀÄ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÁvÀäPÀ C©ü¥ÁæAiÀÄPÉÌ ¥ÀjºÁgÀ ¥ÁªÀw ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¤gÁPÉëÃ¥ÀuÁ ¥ÀvæÀ ¤ÃqÀĪÀ ¸ÀA§AzsÀ zÀqÀzÀPÀ®èºÀ½î UÁæªÄÀ zÀ ¸ÀªÉð£ÀA§gï 129/3gÀ 2478 -4- NC: 2023:KHC:34017 WP No. 16044 of 2022 ZÀ.«Äà «¹ÛÃtðzÀ ¨Á§ÄÛ F PÀbÉÃj¬ÄAzÀ AiÉÆÃd£Á ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ AiÉÆÃd£Á C£ÀĵÁ×£Á WÀlPÀ gÁªÀÄ£ÀUÀgÀªÀgÀ PÀbÉÃjUÉ ¥ÀvæÀ §gÉAiÀįÁVvÀÄÛ.
¢£ÁAPÀ-24.06.2022gÀAzÀÄ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÁvÀäPÀ C©ü¥ÁæAiÀÄ F PÀbÉÃjUÉ §A¢gÀÄvÀÛzÉ. PÁ£ÀÆ£ÁvÀäPÀ C©ü¥ÁæAiÀÄzÀAvÉ gÁ¶ÖçÃAiÀÄ ºÉzÁÝj PÁ¬ÄzÉ -1956 jÃvÀå ¸ÀPÀëªÀÄ ¥Áæ¢üPÁgÀPÉÌ ªÀÄAeÁgÁzÀ ¥Áè£ï£ÀÄß ¥ÀjµÀÌj¸À®Ä ¤gÁPÉëÃ¥ÀuÁ ¤ÃqÀĪÀ CªÀPÁ±À EgÀĪÀÅ¢®è ªÀÄvÀÄæ AiÀÄxÁ ¹Üw PÁ¥ÁqÀ®Ä CªÀPÁ±À EgÀĪÀÅ¢®è. DzÀÝjAzÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ-20.11.2021gÀ Cfð Request NOC for Revised Layout Plan ¸ÀA§AzsÀ ¤gÁPÉëÃ¥ÀuÁ ¤ÃqÀ®Ä gÀºÀ«gÀÄ¢®è."

4. It is the situation that has constrained the petitioner to be before the Court.

5. Despite giving sufficient opportunity, there is neither representation on behalf of the respondents nor any objection is filed.

6. A perusal of the endorsement at Annexure-K issued by the Town Planning Authority, Mysuru and the endorsement at Annexure-L issued by the National Highway Authority reveal that the same do not stand for any logic or reasoning in accordance with law. Nothing is brought on record to justify the reasons assigned in the said endorsements to the effect that merely because a portion of the land is acquired for public purpose, the land owner is prohibited either to enjoy the remaining land or to seek revised layout plan in that regard. No -5- NC: 2023:KHC:34017 WP No. 16044 of 2022 other reason is assigned in the impugned Annexures-K and L. When a request is made in this behalf, the respondent authorities, who are vested with the statutory duty, are required to give justifiable legally acceptable reasons to decline the request made by the petitioners. That not having been done, the impugned Annexures, in principle, are required to be set aside for want of justifiable reasons.

7. In that view of the matter, Annexures-K and L are set aside. The matter is remitted to the respondent authorities to consider the request made by the petitioners in accordance with law and such consideration should be made within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this Court.

8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is allowed.

Sd/-

JUDGE ND