Chikthopaiah vs The State Of Karnataka on 19 July, 2010

[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Chikthopaiah vs The State Of Karnataka on 19 July, 2010

Bench: Ram Mohan Reddy

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA. 

THE HON'BI..E MR.JUSTI§E  M0I'!AlSfV"E(EI;tI«)"';"V  _

_%-

DATED THIS THE 19"! DAY OF J_I.J_1fY.;,:.2(:).'1  '  H

BEFORE

WRIT PETITION No. 256i§8.- */00 OF E2 '069 tLA--RES]

C/w w.P.No. :"3.Q528'430'T_jof'2009 (LA-RES)

w.p. 25633-700/09-~   T

 'C"1?1 i'I{5i5i:'iOi5?xLAH* . E 

 S/C L,A*ETE§V._TH.OE?A'iA__Pi. _'
AGED ABC) UT'E»53*¥;E1§.Rs.

R'/AT NO';.W}'\.RI') ' No; 1.
E3111'-.\.NPI.G ERE, EETENSIO N .

' " 'KUN}GL%14V)fOWN1

 TIUMKUR 

' £352;

A 'vv._f3';'I';'£{::}\NGAI'PA
 S/30 l';A'~§'"E THOPAIAI-ri

ACEEE-D'AB0U1' 55 YEARS.

 E" #51' NOWARD NO. 1.
.. BIDANAGERE EX'1'E3NS1ON.
 KUNIGAL TOWN.

TU M KU R DIST.

DODDA T1"'lOP1*ZGOWDA

S / O LATE VEN KATAPPA @ MOTAIAH
AGED AIBOUT 55 YEARS.

R/AT NO.WA.RD NO.1.

BIDANAGERE EXTENSION.
KUNIGA1. TOWN.



TUMKUR DIST.

B.T.SHI\/'ANNA
S/O LATE VE3NKA'E'A.PPA @ MOTAIAH
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.

R/AT NOWARD N01.

BIDANAGERF3 EXTENSION.»  ~
KUNIGAL TOWN. 
TUMKUR DEST.

I-3. L.1\/IANCHAIAH 'A --  

s/0 LATE LENGAEAH @ "YE§LLAvAiAH'4_"'A 

AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, _  "
R/AT NO.WARD__ No. if  
BIDANAGERE EX'i"1:Ns:_:Q--Ni;
KUNIGAL TOWN, '- ' :
'FUMKUF{''D__EST.  "


 s/0 RAvI'\§G«A¥'VI"A.._  .
'AGED' ABOUT 'E19"'ifE'A.RS.

R/,A'rA%No;wwARD_ 'N931',
BEDANAG ERE'~.E)X'fENS£ON.

;' ~ KUNIQAL Tcjwr-J.
* j_:jU1\{1KU 1:2""13.1.._~fa.'_.r..v

» .g3;*F;GANGA1AH
' ~.S'/.0 I.fATI«; 'I'H1MMAIAH

AL}v.F§_[)A'3\[3OUT 60 YEARS.
_F<;'A'i?' NOWARD NO. 1.

" .. BIDANAGERE EXTENSION.

KLUNEGAI, TOWN.

TUMKUR DIST.

E3.C.RANGAIAi~i

S / O LATE CI"iENNATH£MMA[A.H
AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS.

R/AT NO.V\/ARD NO. I.

BIDAN AG I:CRI:£ P3X'FENSEON.
KUNIGAL TOWN.

ﬁri



10

ll

TUEVIKUR DIST.

B.T. RANGASWAMY
S/O LATE THOPEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.

R/AT NOWARD NO. E.
BIDANAGERE. EXTENSION.»  -
KUNIGAL TOWN. 
TUMKUR DIST.

B.R.JAYARAM  
s/0 LATE RANGAPPA  '
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,  
R/AT NO.WARD 1V'O.1_;V _ A'
BIDANAGERE EX"E'ENE3._IC2-N}.
KUNIGAL TOWN. '  :
'rUMKU'R'D_1s'r.;'''' "

   
 S/__0 LATE.3_"r1%1Ru;v;AL.A1AH
"AGE;D' ABOUT "60 '-{EA12s.

R,¥._AT.NO';W£':R£) N.Q'.':'.
BIDANAQEREEXTENSION.

' ~ ;iUN1c;-AL TOWN.

'  ET:UMKUR"'D

T 
' -.S=,!.Q' RAMANNA

AG-ED)'-\BOU'1' 35 YEARS.

v_£<;A'.1= NOWARD NOE.

" .. BAIDANAGERE EXTENSION'.

=KUNIGAL TOVVN.

TU M KU R DIST.

B . S . DWA RAKANA'I'H

S / O LATE ARCHAKA SAMPATH.AL9xI--I
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.

R/AT NO.WARD NO.1.

BIDANAG ERIC EX'l'l€NSION,

bi



KUNIGAL TOVVN.
TUMKUR DIST.

{By Sri : R s RAVI & NARENDRA D V OOwDA«;._}\DVf)"C' 

AND :

0':

THE, S'E'A'l'E OF KARNPC1-".AKA  "
REP BY ITS SECRETAR--§{  ._
DEPARTMENT OF' RI5vEN»III«:..u
M.S.BUILDING.  _ ..   
DR.AMBEDKAR-.VE',E3IZ--I_H1., .
BANGALORE--56O 001 '  

THE S'fA.TE.. OF   .
REP BY  I?I§I1*~.ICIIj_JIxL SECREZTARY

V~'i)E%:PAI2:TMVIéf§§«I'I' OI+ﬁ"I-RRIC;"A'"I'I'ON
gM.s.BUI--LD_I_NO   .
"Ii)£2.AI\/I.'3I5I:>,I§AI<'.\/I3 I;::1HI

BAN OIAIIO.RI:a560"'---Q0' I

1 ' "7Ti€£E.VSP»EVCV?'11'-"Ii. IAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
 III5MAvA'mI__.CANAI. DIVISION.

TUMKUR

"  NIRAVARI NIGAMA NIYAMITI-IA

REE: MANAGING DIRECTOR
CO _« _+?'L<3E BOARD.
DR.AM{3E2DKAR VE[~3{)HI.

" {_3_§\NGA1.0RE--56O om

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
CAUVERI NIRAVARI NIGAMA NIYAMITHA
i-£{<3MAVA'I'I~II CANAL DIVISION.

TUMKUR

THE Di.§PU"I'Y COMMISSIONER

bi

 I'9E1I..T_l_'J1"1VV(':)'I'*4iT;7.¥'ZC'wV.



TU M KU R D 1 ST.
TUNE KUR

(By SMT: SHWEZTHA ANAND. ADV FOR ;RA_TT& 'A5  " .1  'V, 
{BY SR1. M KESHAVA REDDY. R1."-2 é;r__5~;' * " ~ 

THESE PETITIONS P-"ELFE-ff) UNDER _ARTE*(:'I;E.. 226 02;?
227 OF THE CONSTlTUTlC}N"~OF INDIA--ZPRAYING TO
DECLARE THE NOTIFICATION DATED  26-0004
PUBLISHED IN TIT'E~~.__ KARNATAKA-._ GAZETTE DATED
29/07/2004 ISSUED"BY.T£:{Ei_'E{6°'V'ii)I£--.,ANN~A AND THE
FINAL NOTIFICATION DATED'"I:8..0_5';v.'mI::LIsI«TED IN THE
KARNATAKA GAZE'1'i'E;"'~-I)I!\'I'ED, I7i--8¥05. VIDE ANN~C.
ISSUED BY,TI«~I.E1'-RI;:_ IN .ssIO'44FAIﬁ<i.As,i"I'HE PETITIONERS'
LAND IS 4_.c,ON;CEA:NED;-_V LAP'-SEES EY OPERATION OF
SEC"I'lOP1'=i$ I_1"{A)""OETH-E"LAND-._ACQUISITION ACT; AND

WP 3k3_52__&53S0",I{2.D0309  - '

BETWEEDN' .

I  vS__M'Iu' AKKAM._ARAM MA
 'W/O LATE GANGAIAH.
*  ».AOE'D ABOUT 76 YEARS.
*  I. BIDANAOERE. KUNIGAL TOWN.
' TUNIKLIR DISTRICT.

2" . TAO'; 'SRANOASWAIVIAIAII.
' S,-'O LATE OANOAIAI--I.

" =  AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.

R/AT NO.62/ I9, 19TH CROSS.
IST BLOCK. RAJAJINAGAR.
BANGALORE.

3 B.G. CHANDRAIAH
S / O LATE GAN GAIAI-*1.
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS.

M

 ..EEsr>ONDEN'TsVV' 



B.T.Shivanna

-- dry"-laind' '

B. L. Manchaiah

B. R.Rangaiah

13.T.Gangaiah'_ 

. .  

 0-14

0- 14
wet land

 dvfy land: &

B'.'C_.. Rangéiah:

0-22
dry land

 g

_  B .T...Raflga_sVuzan-1y  »
 *f8,»R.Jayar'a.In¢_ '

1-5
Oﬁl 1
wet land

0 ' Rw5fra.HdI1éId'?5I"' .0
_ LOk€'sI': _  0 V

100/2
100/3

0- 5
wet land

3 :8 ; E)-warakanath

109

2-8

both wet 8:

dry land

Iii?w.v¥§.0Nd.3o528»3o/2009:

i?'etitibner

0 *  _N0s.

Name

Sy.N0.

Extent
Acres 8:;
guntas

51,2813.

Akkamaramma
B.G. Rangaswamiah
I3.G.Chandraiah

91
93/2
97/1
105/1
105/2

0-6
1-36
0-28
0-25
0- 10

id:



-9-

2. The Deputy Commissioner, 'I'iiml<uirj"'is_'s«1.i'e.d a

notification under subsection [l) of 

Land Acquisition Act. 1984:-."""i"o-r.  »iAct'..p  2'

proposing to acquire 43.15 acijes_Vincl1.i'din~g tltixeﬂands

belonging to the petit.io1ie1*s.t'oilay anpilritiggitionlllcanal for

Hemavati pro}'eet...':ﬁinotifieation dt.
26.6.2004,  also inipthe  Some of the
petitioners;_" 4LEiﬁ.;'rv11.ittoad"have?2iile.d_:f2objections to the
  is alleged. were in a
 in a proceeding under
Sect.io1;{»._._V5{.A2)2V' "  Act. a.s animated in the

.i:'eieo:ninendat:ionwof the 31" respondent. The State

2 "G0V'e.i'i"irnveA1ii--..is said to have issued. notification under {1} of Section 6 of the Act. on 1.8.2005 published in the Karnataka Gazette dated 17.8.2005 2' V._Aij.11exLire~C and in the newspapers on 18.8.2005 and 24.8.2005 Annexures--D and D1. It is the further allegation of the petitioners that the 6"' respondent. did Li':

ill not make an award within two years froniwthe"-d:'a.te.. of publication of the final notification but 17.8.2009, much after t.hev'JfllfeXp«iiy'--«. of prescribed by Section 117A of tI':._ef}'-\_<tt. petition to declare the "'p.iiel»imir1a'ryV_"notification dt. 26.6.2004 and the:final'fii'otiifi.g:;tti'o«n on"i;is.2005, as having lapsed by operavtiicinfhyoi' ;1._l--~--A of the Act.

3. 2' filing statement of obje:et:ion's" Sp1.Land Acquisition Officer" certain persons filed w.p_.Np¢s.sssat/zoos.2".4364/2006 and E3737/20-06 thiapcourt and obtained an interim order of stay ffd'ivs'possf§:vssion in W.P.No.983/2006. On the d'is11"ai.'ssali"'()f the writ pei'.it.ions by order dt. 27.11.2008 is the interim order stood dissolved. the State having secured certified copy of the said order 19.12.2008. the 'T award passed on i7.8.2009 is within time. in addition, it is stated that the beneficiary, respondent No.4 UK

-i l-

Cauveri Niravari Niyarna Nigarnita did not d.e'p.os.it~'--Vthe amount payable as compensation to :r:l'ols?e*;<§;'tb and therefore. steps could not;""i3e«ta_l<en"'to"

award at the earliest. In addition, sii:1ce--. the" .:For'es_t Department was requested..Lt:oc»furnish of the malki, the land hol'ders kiziviritg perniirttevd them to enter upon the land we_re.AA_'.pending before this Court, on the:'«.di'spo:salgtifithrellviiritV 1:ieftit'.ic3ns, malkis were valued on 23.7.2009 and lieitcie, '-- the 17.8.09. According to 3"' respondent ..r1oti._ces_ udder siibsection {2} of Section 12 of t_li5e Aet when""i«s.S_1__£ed to the land owners, compensation ' {was ~r_e'eei~Ved._by some of the land owners. According to 0 .301" respon.d'e11t. the delay in passing the award was not intentional but due to administrative and other reasons. H4. The petition is opposed by filing statement of ol:iject,ions dt. 19.4.2010 of respondents 4 and 5. inter alia contending that the writ petitions are belated, and M D an after thought. questioning the va1id'i~ty_"VVV.offthe acquisition proceedings on the passing._o_t'».the" a_war'd., The land acquired for a pub_1ic::..p'tij.r;u3--ose.; '---.t4o..'vi.r'rig,at'e hundreds of acres of1and..7it.___is stated thaa.t'th--e_ai1egat.io1fi'; of the petitioners that no up from Kms.187 to 191 ,/faisei "The State Government. the lands on commenced for it3.on1p1et,ed from Kms 187 to the earth is in progress in Kms. as Kms..l91, it is stated ireishi__tIenders"are___issued. In addition, it is stated that ';.Vt'iiere.__Vw¢re"'writ petitions pending before this court 'wiierein*'ii_1te1*im order of stay was granted and extended fi"orntt;_i.n1e to time a.nd on the disposal of the writ .V:pde"i;.it.ions on 27.11.2008. the certified Copy received on 17.8.2009 the award is well within time. tzsi

-13..

5. The petitioners have filed a 19.6.2010 stating that the respondents the delay in passing of the a\tr:§1lrd.llattrlibuﬁrlg'the's'arn.e, T to the pendeney of the writ. pet:'i--tilo*ns before"this';eos_£rt.. in one of which interim stay: the question of a legalzlléplljar awardulwithin the statutory period LA of the Act.

did not theselpetitioners who had not addition, it is stated had nothing to do with the passing'-.._o1". and taking possession as t§oht,e_rnplated"b;z._Seetion 16 of the Act and therefore, the 0 award could not be passed during the the writ petition is untenable.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and 'perused the pleadings. Dates relevant for the purpose 0 of establishing that the awarddt. 17.8.2009 was beyond the period of two years from the publication of the Lek their ,I--L notification under Section 6(1) of the under Section 1 1--A of the Act are:

1] Preliminary n0t.ifica§t.'i0h::'Ci'L.V on 29.7.2004 and 1'-_V_A}.3ubii'f5,..}.1Aeci«. the newspapers oh . 2004 an L' Final not.ifieati0_i_i"'-.eit.._ gijazetted on 17.8.2O0:3'_...""<1I"1C.':A[ in theiivnewspapers on 1 8. 8.

Awi-Ja1*--d 27000.

m}"d'ic:i#i'i'd-5...24.. 1-.2000 in W.P.983/2006. i'oef-.staﬁyV'y0foispossiession in the petition fiiecl by i . at Si.No.17 and 20 of the 0 2 _V 11:] al -:1 0':_ii'i'c:.ai,i0i1. _ Dis1'r1"i'ssalofW.P. 983/O6 on 27.11.08. Q-:=-i't.iiied copy of order obtaiiied on 19.12.08. is not the ease of the resp0nder1t««State that lands.

Ah the oe-titi0ne1*s had preferred writ petitions and obtained im;e1'im orders of stay in the matter of acquisition of The Stay of dispossession of lands belonging to Thimmanna in WP, 983/O6, did not enure JR "ii to the benefit of these petitioners and not come in the way of the Spi.Land (_)i'fic"eru to pass the award. It is not';pas:_i4fA this interim order prevented the Spvecial Officer from making the .

8. In the but be said that the awarcldt. the petitioners' lands made3._pl)e§;ondV the; perioddofu Vtwlo years prescribed under Sect.i<§1fI. _l LA-.ol'~.the_ Act the entire acquisition of lands ljeplongirig to'th4e--«._pe'£fitioners commencing from the iss1_ie~0_f preli.rn'iI'1'aryV'notification under subsection (1) of S_et':t'ion ~'1_ho*£the Act. is declared non-est. needless to state that if the State g0v_er11_m'en~t desires to acquire the lands belonging to the pe'i:--itioners, in exercise of eminent domain power, for "gpubllic purpose, it is open for it to do so strictly in " '-'accordance with law.

tit .15 In the result, the writ petitions are The preliminary and final Ixotifications and the award cit". 17.8.2009 V petitioners are quashed. - _ %a "ﬁ JUDGE 1n.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court