IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION No.19563/2017 AND WRIT PETITION Nos.14752-14757/2018 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN:
1. SMT. KALYANAMMA, D/O LATE BETTEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS.
2. SMT. PUTTAMMA, D/O LATE BETTE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS.
3. SMT. MAHADEVAMMA D/O LATE BETTEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS.
4. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA, D/O LATE BETTEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS.
5. SMT. PUTTATHAYAMMA, W/O LATE NAREASIMHEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS.
6. SMT. JAYAMMA, W/O LATE NARASIMHEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS.
7. SMT. SHIVAMMA W/O LATE SINGRE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS.
ALL ARE R/AT BELAVADI VILLAGE, ILAWALA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK-571 301.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI V. SRINIVAS, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001 2. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001 3. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, HEAD OFFICE AT 4TH AND 5TH FLOOR, EAST WING KHANIJA BHAVANA, RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE-560001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
4. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, MYSORE DIVISION, MYSORE-18.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI E.S. INDIRESH, AGA FOR R1 AND R2, SRI I. GOPALAKRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R3 AND R4) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE ACQUSITION UNDER SEC. 28(4) OF THE KIADB ACT DATED 5.12.2006 ISSUED BY R-1 WITH RESPECT TO PETITIONERS LAND I.E., LAND BEARING SY.NO.96/32 DHANI MEASURING 4 ACRES VIDE ANNEX-F TO W.P. IS LAPSED IN VIEW OF SEC. 27 OF THE KARNATAKA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT 1987 OR UNDER SEC. 24(2) OF THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT 2013 WITH RESPECT TO PETITIONER'S LAND AND CONSEQUENTLY; AND ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri V. Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioners. Sri E.S.Indiresh, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Sri I. Gopalakrishna, learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4.
2. The writ petitions are admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In these petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners inter alia seek a direction to the respondents to pass an award as contemplated under the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 together with interest at 18% p.a.
4. Facts giving rise to filing of the writ petitions briefly stated are that the father of petitioner Nos.1 to 4 and father-in-law of petitioner Nos.5 to 7, Sri Bettegowda was granted a land bearing Sy.No.96/32 measuring 4 acres situated at Koorgahalli Village, Mysore Taluk. The respondents proposed to form an industrial area and issued a preliminary notification on 18.3.2006 and eventually, a final notification was issued on 5.12.2006 and acquired the land. A sum of Rs.17,50,000/- per acre was fixed as compensation. Though the petitioners made an application dated 11.3.2016 vide Annexure-J for grant of compensation in their name, the same has not been considered.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondents ought to have appreciated that saguvalli chit in respect of the land in question was issued in favour of Sri Bettegowda and that he is the owner of the land in question and the petitioners being his legal representatives cannot be deprived of their rights to hold the property under Article 300A of the Constitution of India.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents have disputed the title of the petitioners.
7. I have considered the submissions made on both the sides and have perused the records.
8. After making the submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners agreed that the Special Land Acquisition Officer be directed to pass an award and thereafter the matter be referred to the reference court under Sections 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which may determine the question of title in a time bound manner.
9. In view of the submissions made and taking into account that in a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, this Court cannot adjudicate the question of title and in the facts of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petitions with a direction to the Special Land Acquisition Officer to pass an award and thereafter, the matter shall be referred for adjudication under Sections 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The reference court shall make an endeavor to conclude the proceedings within a period of four months after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties. Needless to state that in case the petitioners are found to be the owners of the property in question, the compensation shall be disbursed to them within a period of one month thereafter.
With the aforesaid directions, the petitions are disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE MD