IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.26803/2018 (LA - RES) Between:
The Estate Manager, Estate Management Unit, Government of India, Ministry of Defence, DRDO Township, C.V.Raman Nagara, Bangalore – 560 093.
Represented by its Estate Manager, M.V.L.N. Rao, Aged about 55 years.
…Petitioner (By Sri.H.C.Sundaresh, Advocate) And:
1. Thimmarayappa, S/o late Munishamappa, Aged about 63 years, 2. Muniraju, S/o late Munishamappa, Aged about 45 years, 3. Akkaiahmma, D/o late Munishamappa, Aged about 54 years, 4. Chikkarangamma, W/o late Pilla Mariappa, Aged about 57 years, 5. Ramesh, S/o late Pilla Mariappa, Aged about 37 years, 6. Muniraju, S/o late Pilla Mariappa, Aged about 29 years, All are R/at: Kattugollahalli Village, Bidarahalli Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk – 560 093.
7. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Vishweshwaraiah Center, 3rd Floor, Podium Block, Bangalore – 560 001.
...Respondents (By Sri.D.R.Sundaresha, CGC for R1 to - 6 (Absent) R7 served and unrepresented) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the judgment and award passed by the II – Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore in LAC No.160/2007 dated 16.12.2016 vide Annexure – D and issue direction to the reference court to reopen LAC No.160/2007 and to issue notice to the petitioner and to pass award after hearing beneficiary and etc., This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in ‘B’ Group, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Sri. M.C. Sundaresh, learned Counsel for the petitioner.
None appear for respondents No.1 to 6 and for respondent No.7.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.
2. In this writ petition, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner, inter alia, has assailed the validity of the award dated 16.12.2016 passed by the II Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore in LAC No.160/2007.
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the beneficiary in respect of the land in question and in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Vs. Gyan Devi (Dead) by LRs.[(1995) 2 SCC 326], the petitioner ought to have been impleaded in the proceedings before the Reference Court. However, the impugned award has been passed and the amount of compensation has been enhanced without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
4. It is also alleged that the impugned order has been passed in contravention of the law laid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. In respect of aforesaid aspect of the matter, the same would not be disputed by the learned Addl. Government Advocate.
5. In view of the aforesaid submission and in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, supra and taking into account the fact that the petitioner, who is a beneficiary, was not impleaded in the proceedings before the Reference Court, the impugned award dated 16.12.2016 is hereby quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded to the Reference Court to decide the claim of respondents No.1 to 6 afresh by a speaking order expeditiously after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of eight months from today.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Psg*