Karnataka High Court
Raju S/O Ramappa Karigar vs The State Of Karanataka on 29 January, 2024
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2004
WP No. 108902 of 2016
C/W WP No. 109047 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 108902 OF 2016 (LA-RES)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO. 109047 OF 2016
IN WP NO. 108902 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
1. RAJU S/O RAMAPPA KARIGAR
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: TERADAL, TQ: JAMKHANDI,
DIST: BAGALKOT.
2. MALLAPPA S/O PARAPPA TARADAL
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: KALLATTI GALLI, TERADAL,
TQ: JAMAKHANDI,
DIST: BAGALKOT.
3. SHANKAREPPA S/O PARAPPA TARADAL
AGE: 63 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
SUJATA R/O: KALLATTI GALLI, TERADAL,
SUBHASH TQ: JAMAKHANDI,
PAMMAR DIST: BAGALKOT.
Digitally signed by
(BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN IS NOT CLAIMED)
SUJATA SUBHASH
PAMMAR 4. PRAVEEN S/O ASHOK AVARADI,
Date: 2024.02.27
23:41:42 -0800 AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: NEAR SIDDESHWAR TEMPLE,
TERADAL, TQ: JAMAKHANDI,
DIST: BAGALKOT.
5. PRABHU S/O MURIGEPPA KALATIPPI
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: KALLATTI GALLI, TERADAL,
TQ: JAMKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT.
6. JAYASHRI W/O CHANDRASHEKARAYYA
JAMAKHANDIMATH
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2004
WP No. 108902 of 2016
C/W WP No. 109047 of 2016
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: TERADAL, TQ: JAMKHANDI,
DIST: BAGALKOT.
PRESENTLY RESIDING AT C/O:
ERAYYA S HIREMATH,
AT/POST: HALKARN-416506,
TQ: GADENGLAZ, DIST: KOLAPUR,
MAHARASTRA STATE.
7. KASHINATH S/O SHRIKANTHAYYA
JAMAKHANDIMATH
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: NEAR PRABHULINGESHWAR TEMPLE,
TERADAL, TQ: JAMAKHANDI,
DIST: BAGALKOT.
8. APPASI S/O SOMAPPA KATTIMANI
AGE: 36 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: # 672, TERADAL
TERADAL, TQ: JAMAKHANDI,
DIST: BAGALKOT.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. PRASHANT S KADADEVAR., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARANATAKA
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
LAND ACQUISITION 1 AND 3,
M.S. BUILDING,
BENGALURU-560001.
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND
SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
JAMAKAHANDI,
TQ: JAMAKHANDI.
3. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER CONSTRUCTION UBL
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
CLUB ROAD KESHWAPUR,
HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2004
WP No. 108902 of 2016
C/W WP No. 109047 of 2016
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI. MALLIKARJUN S HIREMATH., ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DECLARE
ENTIRE LAND ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS BEING
UNDERTAKEN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF BAGALKOT-
KUDACHI RAILWAY LINE IN VIEW OF FINAL NOTIFICATION
BEARING NO.RD 44 BHUSWAVI 2014 DATED:15.03.2014
ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 AND 2 (ANNEXURE-B) AS
LAPSED IN SO FAR AS THE LANDS OF THE PETITIONERS
HEREIN ARE CONCERNED.
IN WP NO.109047/2016
BETWEEN:
1. SADASHIV S/O PUNDALIK THATRAPAGOL,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
2. ISHWARAPPA S/O SIDDALINGAPPA KITTUR,
AGE: 67 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
(BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN IS NOT CLAIMED)
3. SIDDAPPA S/O BASAPPA KITTUR,
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
4. RATNAWWA W/O KALLAPPA NARIGOND,
AGE: 60 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
5. BHOPAL S/O BASAPPA NARIGOND,
AGE: 67 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
(BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN IS NOT CLAIMED)
6. BHIMAPPA S/O APPANNA YENDIGERI,
AGE: 72 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2004
WP No. 108902 of 2016
C/W WP No. 109047 of 2016
(BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN IS NOT CLAIMED)
7. BASAPPA S/O BIRAPPA TATRAPGOL,
AGE: 66 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
(BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN IS NOT CLAIMED)
8. ADAMSAB S/O RAJASAB THARTHARI,
AGE: 65 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
(BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN IS NOT CLAIMED)
9. NAGAPPA S/O MUTTAPPA DAPALAPUR,
AGE: 34 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
10. SHETTEPPA S/O MUDAKAPPA HOSAMANI,
AGE: 73 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
(BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN IS NOT CLAIMED)
11. BASAVARAJ S/O IRAPPA AWARADI,
AGE: 67 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
(BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN IS NOT CLAIMED)
12. DUNDAPPA S/O IRAPPA AWARADI,
AGE: 61 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
(BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN IS NOT CLAIMED)
13. ASHOK S/O RUDDRAPPA AWARADI,
AGE: 63 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
(BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN IS NOT CLAIMED)
14. TAVANAPPA S/O GIRAMALLAPPA PARAMGOND,
AGE: 41 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
15. MAHAVEER S/O GIRAMALLAPPA PARAMGOND,
AGE: 51 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
16. JINNAPPA S/O GIRAMALLAPPA PARAMGOND,
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
17. APPASAHEB S/O ALLASANI KALAVANT,
AGE: 48 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
18. ABAHYKUMAR S/O BALASAHEB PATIL,
AGE: 54 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2004
WP No. 108902 of 2016
C/W WP No. 109047 of 2016
19. SURESH S/O BALASAHEB PATIL,
AGE: 48 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
20. SANJEEV S/O BALASAHEB PATIL,
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
21. SUNIL S/O BASAPPA GUDDI,
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
22. SOMANING S/O PRADHANI GUDDI,
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
23. MALLAPPA S/O NYAMANNA GUMMANNAVAR,
AGE: 53 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
24. DHARMANNA S/O PARIS NAGANUR,
AGE: 72 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
(BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN IS NOT CLAIMED)
25. LAXMIBAI S/O NEMINATH HANAMANNAVAR,
AGE: 75 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
26. BASAPPA S/O APPANNA THAKKANAVAR,
AGE: 33 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
27. NIMBEVVA W/O PARAGOUDA THAKKANAVAR,
AGE: 36 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
28. SIDDAPPA S/O RAYAPPA THAKKANAVAR,
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
29. SHRIKANT S/O MALLAPPA NARIGOND,
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
30. MAYAPPA S/O BASAPPA KARIGAR,
AGE: 54 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
31. MAGEPPA S/O ISHWARAPPA GADADI,
AGE: 41 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
32. SHASHIKALA W/O SURESH NYAMAGOUD,
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
33. NANDKISHOR S/O RATANLAL RATHI,
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2004
WP No. 108902 of 2016
C/W WP No. 109047 of 2016
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
34. BHARAT S/O RATANLAL RATHI,
AGE: 53 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
35. NAGAPPA S/O PARAPPA GUDDI,
AGE: 53 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
36. SIDDAPPA S/O PARAPPA GUDDI,
AGE: 49 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
37. MAHADEV S/O PARAPPA GUDDI,
AGE: 50 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
38. ERAPPA S/O SIDDAPPA SINDAGI,
AGE: 34 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
39. TAMKMANNA S/O BASAPPA GUDDI,
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
40. RAVEENDRA S/O RUDRAPPA AWARADI,
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
41. SHRIMANTH S/O TOPANNA GARAGATTI,
AGE: 66 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
(BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN IS NOT CLAIMED)
42. PRAVEEN S/O ASHOK AWARADI,
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
43. PARAPPA S/O RAMAPPA KATTIMANI,
AGE: 63 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
(BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN IS NOT CLAIMED)
44. SUREKHA W/O BASAVARAJ AWARADI,
AGE: 57 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
45. SAHADEV S/O SHIVAPPA INAPUR,
AGE: 53 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
46. CHANDRAKANTH S/O MALLAPPA NARIGOND,
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
47. NANDAKISHOR S/O BUJABALLI NARIGOND,
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2004
WP No. 108902 of 2016
C/W WP No. 109047 of 2016
AGE: 43 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
48. BABURAU S/O PANDIT GOLASANGI,
AGE: 56 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
49. SURESH S/O HULEPPA MANTUR,
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
50. SHRIMANT S/O PARIS MAGADUM,
AGE: 80 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
(BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN IS NOT CLAIMED)
51. PADMAVVA W/O KALLPPA ULAGOND,
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
52. ABDULRAZAK S/O PASHCHASAB RAMADURG,
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
53. RAYAPPA S/O SIDDAPPA ULAGOND,
AGE: 63 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
(BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN IS NOT CLAIMED)
54. MAHAVIR S/O PARIS NYAMGOUD,
AGE: 54 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
55. RAJENDRA S/O KALLPPA ULAGOND,
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
56. JINNAPPA S/O SHRIPAL TEJANNAVAR,
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
57. GANDANA W/O ANAND MAMADAPUR,
AGE: 36 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
58. NIMBEVVA W/O DHAREPPA PATIL,
AGE: 47 YEARS, OCCN: AGRICULTURE,
ALL ARE R/O: TERADAL,
TQ: JAMAKHANDI,
DIST: BAGALKOT
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. PRASHANT S KADADEVAR., ADVOCATE)
-8-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2004
WP No. 108902 of 2016
C/W WP No. 109047 of 2016
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY THE
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
M.S. BUILDING,
BENGALURU-560001.
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, AND
SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
JAMAKHANDI,
TALUKA JAMAKHANDI.
3. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER CONSTRUCTION UBL
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
CLUB ROAD KESHWAPUR,
HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI. MALLIKARJUN S. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE ENTIRE LAND
ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS BEING UNDERTAKEN FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF BAGALKOT-KUDACHI RAILWAY LINE IN
VIEW OF FINAL NOTIFICATION BEARING NO.RD 44 BHUSWAVI
2014 DATED:15.03.2014 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 AND 2
(ANNEXURE-B) AS LAPSED IN SO FAR AS THE LANDS OF THE
PETITIONERS HEREIN CONCERNED.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
B'GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-9-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2004
WP No. 108902 of 2016
C/W WP No. 109047 of 2016
ORDER
The lands belonging to the petitioners herein were proposed to be acquired for the purpose construction of new Bagalakote-Kuduchi railway line by issuing a preliminary notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1894", for short) dated 15.01.2013. After holding an enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act, 1894, the final notification under Section 6(1) of the Act, 1894 was published on 15.03.2014 to acquire the subject lands.
2. This petition is filed to declare that the acquisition proceedings initiated stands lapsed by operation of Section 25 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, since the award is not passed within the stipulated time.
3. This Court vide order dated 18.01.2018 granted an interim order, staying all further proceedings pursuant to the award said to be drawn by the respondent No.2 and sent for approval on 24.10.2016.
4. The preliminary notification was published on 15.01.2013, and before issuance of the final notification under Section 6(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 2013", for short) came into force with effect from 01.01.2014. Section 114 of the Act, 2013 deals with repeal and saving, and sub
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2004 WP No. 108902 of 2016 C/W WP No. 109047 of 2016 Section (2) states that the repeal under sub Section (1) shall not be held to prejudice or affect the general application of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, with regard to the effect of repeals. Therefore, the State Government published the final notification on 15.03.2014.
5. The lands are sought to be acquired under the provisions of Act, 1894. Section 24 of the Act deals with land acquisition process under the Act No.1 of 1894 shall be deemed to have been lapse in certain cases, and sub-Section 1(a) states that where no award under Section 11 of the Act 1894 have been made, then all provisions of this Act relating to the determination of compensation shall apply. To put it simply, an award has to be passed under the Act, 2013, though the acquisition process was initiated under the Act, 1894, where no award is passed.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the award having not been passed within twelve months as mandated under Section 25(1) of the Act, 2013, the acquisition stands lapsed. He further argues that the order extending the time to pass the award under the First proviso was passed after expiry of twelve months. Therefore, the order extending the time is void ab-initio.
7. Learned AGA for the State would submit that Section 25 of the Act, 2013 which deals with the period within which the award shall be made provides for extension of time for passing the award. Therefore, in exercise of the power under Section 25 of the Act, 2013, the award has been passed
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2004 WP No. 108902 of 2016 C/W WP No. 109047 of 2016 and the same is in conformity with the provisions of the Act, 2013.
8. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
9. It is undisputed, preliminary notification as well as final notification were issued under the provisions of the Act, 1894, and therefore, the respondent - authority was required to pass an award under the provisions of the Act, 2013 as stated under Section 24(1) of the Act, 2013.
10. Section 25 of the Act, 2013 deals with the period within which an award shall be made, and it states that the Collector shall make an award within a period of twelve months from the date of publication of the declaration under Section 19, and proviso to Section 25 states that the government shall have the power to extend the period of twelve months if in his opinion circumstances exist justifying the same.
11. The final notification under Section 6(1) of the Act, 1894 was published in the official gazette on 27.03.2014 and date of the publication in the Gram Chavadi was on 30.05.2014.. Therefore, in view of the specific provisions contained in Section 25 of the Act, 2013 award should have been passed within twelve months from the date of publication of the notification under Section 19, and the Government has the power to extend the period of twelve months if circumstances exist in justifying the same. The last of the publications in the Gram Chavadi was on 30.05.2014, and the
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2004 WP No. 108902 of 2016 C/W WP No. 109047 of 2016 award ought to have been passed on or before 29.05.2015. In the instant case, the Special Land Acquisition Officer communicated with the State Government on 20.05.2016 to extend the time for passing of the award. The State Government vide communication dated 10.06.2016 extended the time from 30.05.2016 to 30.08.2016. Similar order was passed on 26.09.2016, extending the time for passing of the award to 30.11.2016. The draft award was prepared on 06.05.2016 and the same was approved by the State Government on 24.10.2016.
12. The First proviso to Section 25 of the Act, 2013 provides for extension of time. The proviso does not stipulate the maximum time, which can be extended. When the provision is silent, it is implied that it should be passed within a reasonable time, and the reasonable time depends upon facts and circumstances of each case, but it cannot exceed the original period specified unless there are specific provisions allowing for such extensions. This principle ensures that the Government adheres to the original terms and conditions as much as possible , to promote fairness and prevent the Government from exercising the powers arbitrarily. . The first of the orders was passed extending the time from 30.5.2016 to 30.8.2016, and ultimately the time was extended up to 30.11.2016, and the draft was approved on 24.10.2016. The First proviso to Section 25 speaks about extension of time, but does not state that the appropriate government can pass multiple orders extending the time, and if the time is extended on multiple occasions, the very purpose of Section 25 of the
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2004 WP No. 108902 of 2016 C/W WP No. 109047 of 2016 Act, 2013 would become redundant, thus, resulting in making Section 25 ineffective.
13. The final notification was published in the Grama Chavadi on 30.5.2014 and the award was passed on 24.10.2016 i.e. after a lapse of more than two years five months from the date of the publication.
14. The order passed by the Government extending the time does not specify the circumstances existing justifying the same, and the order only states that in view of Section 24(1), the award has to be passed under the Act, 2013, and the Land Acquisition Officer has requested for extension of time by a period of three months, and since the acquisition is for the public purpose, the time is extended. The similar order was passed by the Government extending the time, and in the absence of any circumstances justifying the extension, the acquisition stands lapsed by operation of the Act, 2013.
15. This Court, vide order dated 18.01.2018, granted an interim order staying all further proceedings pursuant to the award drawn by respondent No.2. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a petition under Section 64(1) of the Act, 2013 for enhancing the compensation, and merely because the petitioner filed a reference application for enhancement of the compensation after filing of the petition and after the interim order was granted by this Court, that would not preclude the petitioner from challenging the acquisition proceedings, since the acquisition proceedings as on the date when the reference
- 14 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2004 WP No. 108902 of 2016 C/W WP No. 109047 of 2016 application was filed, had lapsed by operation of Section 24 of the Act, 2013.
16. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
i) The writ petitions are allowed.
ii) The impugned preliminary notification dated 15.01.2013 issued under Section 4(1) of the Act, 1894 culminating in issuing the final notification dated 15.03.2014 at Annexure-B and the award dated 30.11.2017 passed by respondent No.2 stands quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE RSH,BKM,SSP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 42