Karnataka High Court
Gopalappa S/O Siddaramaiah vs The State Of Karnataka on 14 August, 2012
Author: K.L. Manjunath
Bench: K.L. Manjunath
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2012
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.L. MANJUNATH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SURI APPA RAO
WRIT APPEAL No.463/2007 (LA-KIADB)
C/w
WRIT APPEAL No.772/2007 (LA-KIADB)
BETWEEN:
W.A.No.463/2007:
1. Gopalappa s/o Siddaramaiah,
48 years, Doddathogure village,
Singasandra Post, Bangalore.
2. Krishnappa s/o Siddaramaiah,
58 years, agriculturist,
Doddathogure village,
Singasandra Post,
Bangalore.
3. Nagaraja s/o Siddaramaiah,
43 years, agriculturist,
Doddathogure village,
Singasandra Post,
Bangalore. .. APPELLANTS
(By Advocate Sri.F.Papi Reddy)
2
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka,
By its Secretary to Govt.,
Dept. of Industries & Commerce,
M.S.Buildings, Ambedkar Veedi,
Bangalore.
2. Karnataka Industrial Area
Development Board,
Nrupathunga Road,
Bangalore. By its Chairman
3. The Special Land Acquisition
Officer, Karnataka Industrial
Area Development Board,
VITC Building, 1st floor,
Bangalore.
4. Karnataka Biotechnology &
Information Technology Services
(M/s KBITS), A society registered
under the Karnataka Societies
registration Act,1960, having
its registered office at No.9,
2nd floor, UNI Building,
Thimmaiah Road, Vasanthnagar,
Bangalore.
R/by its authorized signatory
E.Ramakrishnappa, Asst. Secretary &
Head of Legal Department,
Govt. of Karnataka,
Karnataka Biotechnology &
Information Technology
Services .. RESPONDENTS
(Sri.R.B.Sathyanarayana Singh, HCGP for R-1)
(Advocate Sri.P.V.Chandrashekar for R-2 & 3)
(M/s Mahesh & Co. for R-4)
3
BETWEEN:
W.A.No.772/2007:
1. Nanjundappa s/o Mariyappa,
64 years, R/at at Doddathogur
village, Begur Hobli,
bangalore South Tq.
2. Krishnappa s/o late Mariyappa,
52 years, R/at Doddathogure
village, Begur Hobli,
Bangalore South Tq. .. APPELLANTS
(By Advocate Sri.G.R.Lakshmipathy Reddy)
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka,
Commerce & Industries Dept,
M.S.Building, Bangalore.
R/by its Secretary
2. The Executive Member,
KIADB, Nrupathunga Road,
Bangalore.
3. The Special Deputy Commissioner,
KIADB, Nrupathunga Road,
Bangalore.
4. The Special Land Acquisition
Officer, Karnataka Industrial
Area Development Board,
No.10A, 1st floor,
Chandrakiran Building,
Kasturaba Road,
Bangalore.
5. Karnataka Biotechnology &
Information Technology Services
4
(M/s KBITS), A society registered
under the Karnataka Societies
registration Act,1960, having
its registered office at No.9,
2nd floor, UNI Building,
Thimmaiah Road, Vasanthnagar,
Bangalore.
R/by its authorized signatory
E.Ramakrishnappa, Asst. Secretary &
Head of Legal Department,
Govt. of Karnataka,
Karnataka Biotechnology &
Information Technology
Services .. RESPONDENTS
(Sri.R.B.Sathyanarayana Singh, HCGP for R-1)
(Advocate Sri.P.V.Chandrashekar for R-2 to 4)
(M/s Mahesh & Co. for R-5)
- - - - -
WA No.463/2007 is filed under Sec.4 of The
Karnataka High Court Act to set aside the order
passed in WP No.26351/2003 dated 19.1.2007.
WA No.772/2007 is filed under Sec.4 of The
Karnataka High Court Act to set aside the order
passed in WP No.24529/2004 dated 8.1.2007.
These two Appeals are coming on for final
hearing this day, MANJUNATH J. delivered the
following:
J U D G M E N T
These appeals are filed challenging the legality and correctness of the order passed in 5 WP No.26351/2003 dated 19.1.2007 and WP No.24529/2004 dated 8.1.2007.
2. Appellants who are claiming to be the owners of certain extent of agricultural lands are challenging the legality and correctness of the acquisition proceedings initiated by the State Government for the benefit of KIADB. Writ Petitions were filed on the ground that though their property is fully developed and that without considering the developments taken place on their property it has been wrongly notified. It is the case of the appellants that under the preliminary notification 172-04 acres of land was notified for acquisition. When the final notification was issued only 162-21 acres were notified and after final notification 48-14 acres were also deleted and again 5-14 acres was re-allotted to the owners and inspite of acquisition 6-07 acres of land was quashed by this court. Therefore they contend that land 6 acquisition proceedings are completed in regard to 101-15 acres inclusive of lands of the appellants. Learned single Judge has dismissed the writ petition. Challenging the same, these appeals are filed.
3. The main contention of the appellants before us is that KIADB has applied different yard-stick to different persons. In regard to the same survey number based on the requisition of the adjoining owners lands were denotified after final notification on the ground that their property is fully developed. But the case of the appellants has not been considered, even though the appellants property is also fully developed. They have produced number of documents to show the existence of several buildings, temple and also the tombs of their ancestors.
4. After hearing the counsel for appellants and the counsel appearing for KIADB, this court 7 had directed the KIADB to file an affidavit showing the circumstances under which lands were deleted from the acquisition proceedings. Accordingly, affidavit of Sri.Jagannath, Spl. LAO is filed today. He has also produced several orders before the court to show that how the remaining extent of land out of 172-04 acres which were notified under the preliminary notification are deleted from acquisition proceedings. Along with the affidavit, sketch is also produced to show the different extent of lands deleted from the acquisition proceedings. On looking into the sketch property of the appellants are situated in Sy.Nos.71 and 76/5. These lands are situated to the extreme southern side of the acquired lands. To the east of Sy.No.71 major portion of the land is denotified and similarly to the west of Sy.No.71/C lands are also deleted. Similarly to the east of Sy.No.76/5 lands are deleted. When these two 8 lands are adjoining to the deleted lands from acquisition, when those lands are deleted on the ground that those properties are fully developed and when the appellants are also contending that their lands are also required to be deleted on account of the improvement made by them long prior to the acquisition proceedings, appellants are also entitled to seek for the same relief. Learned counsel appearing for the KIADB after arguing at length, on instructions from the Board submitted that if the matter is remanded to the KIADB, it would consider the request of the appellants for deletion of the land considering the decision taken by the Government and KIADB in deleting the lands in Sy.Nos.71, 75 and 76 as the lands of the are also adjoining to the said lands. In view of his submission, we are of the view that it is for the KIADB to consider the request of the appellant for deletion of the lands on the ground of 9 developmental activities taken by the appellants prior to the notification.
5. Accordingly, these appeals are allowed. Orders passed by the learned single Judge in WP No.26351/2003 dated 19.1.2007 and WP 24529/2004 dated 8.1.2007 are set aside. KIADB and the Government are hereby directed to consider the case of the appellants for deletion of their lands in view of the order of deletion in Sy.Nos.25/3, 25/4, 25/5, 75/6 and 71 within a period of 4 months from today. Notification issued under Sec.28(iv) of the Act so far as it relates to the appellants' lands are concerned is set aside.
Sd/-
JUDGE.
Sd/-
JUDGE.
R/180812