IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION No.41355 OF 2017 (LA-RES) BETWEEN:
Shivalingaiah S/o Late Puttalingaiah Aged 48 years, R/at No.2228/1, Kuvempunagar, 2nd Cross, B-M Road, Channapatna, Ramanagar District-562 160. (By Sri. Prakash M.H, Advocate) AND:
1. The State of Karnataka Department of Public works M. S. Building, Bengaluru-560 001. Represented by its Principal Secretary.
2. The Deputy Commissioner Ramanagara District, Kandaya Bhavana, Ramanagara, Ramanagara District-562 128.
… Petitioner 3. The Project Director, National Highways Authority of India, Project Implementation Unit, Basavanapura, Ramanagara, Ramanagara District-562 128.
4. Assistant Executive Engineer, National Highways Sub-Division, No.13/4, 4th floor, CFC Building, Nrupathunga Road, Bengaluru-560 001.
5. The City Municipal Council Channapatna Town, Ramanagara District-562 120 By its Commissioner.
… Respondents (By Sri. R. V. Naik, Advocate for R3;
Sri. E. S. Indiresh, AGA for R1 and R2; R4 – served) This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the schedule property or to demolish the same without following the procedure established under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 Law.
This Writ Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri. Prakash M.H., learned Counsel for the petitioner.
Sri. E. S. Indiresh, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Sri. R. V. Naik, learned counsel for respondent No.3.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner inter alia seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the schedule property or to demolish the same without following the procedure established under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
4. Learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2 submits that whatever action is purported will be done purely in accordance with law.
5. In view of the submissions made, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner or to demolish the schedule property except in accordance with law and in a manner known to law.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Mds/-