IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.37223/2016 (LA-BDA) BETWEEN:
SMT. N. POORNIMA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, W/O. SRI.R.KRISHNA, RESIDING AT NO.720, HMT LAYOUT, NAGSANDRA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 073 (BY SRI. RUKKOJI RAO H.S., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001 ...PETITIONER 2. THE COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 020 3. THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T.CHOWDIAH ROAD, KUMARAPARK WEST, BENGALURU – 560 020 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VENKATESH DODDERI, AGA FOR R1; SRI.K.KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION DTD.30.12.2008 ISSUED BY THE R-2 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G WITH RESPECT TO SY.NO.94/2 MEASURING 0-37 GUNTAS, SITUATED AT BYALAKERE VILLAGE, HESARAGHATTA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Though matter is listed for hearing on Interlocutory Application, by consent of learned Advocates appearing for parties it is taken up for final disposal.
2. Petitioner is seeking for quashing of Notification dated 30.12.2008 – Annexure-G insofar as it relates to Sy.No.94/2 measuring 37 guntas situated at Byalakere Village, Hesaraghatta Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk contending interalia that this Court in W.P.Nos.9640/2014 and other connected matters in the case of T.ASHWATH NARAYANA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS has already held that notification issued by BDA under Section 17 has lapsed and following the said decision similar orders came to be passed in W.P.No.12908/2015 & 15947-948/2015 and connected matters allowing the writ petitions by quashing the preliminary notification and as such, petitioner is seeking for similar orders being passed since his land is also included in the very same notification.
3. Sri.K.Krishna, learned panel counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 does not dispute the factum of Coordinate Bench having held Notification issued under Section 17(1) and (3) by BDA as lapsed in W.P.No.9640/2014 and connected matters by order dated 26.11.2014.
4. It is also not in dispute that Coordinate Bench under similar circumstances in respect of very same preliminary notification has also held that acquisition has lapsed on account of non issuance of final notification and as such, this Court is of the considered view that petitioner herein, who is also challenging the very same preliminary Notification dated 30.12.2008 – Annexure-G issued under Section 17(1) and (3), would be entitled for similar relief as has been granted on 26.11.2014 in W.P.No.9640/2014 and connected matters vide Annexure-E.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER (i) Writ petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) Notification dated 30.12.2008- Annexure-G insofar as it relates to Sy.No.94/2 measuring 37 guntas situated at Byalakere Village, Hesaraghatta Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, is held as having lapsed insofar as land of petitioner is concerned.
(iii) Rule made absolute.
In view of writ petition having been allowed, I.A.Nos.1/2017 for early hearing, does not survive for consideration and same stands rejected.
SD/- JUDGE DR