IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT APPEAL NO.2779 OF 2018 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN:
SRI B.ANJANAPPA S/O LATE BYRANNA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS R/AT NO.255, 3RD ‘B’ CROSS, 3RD STAGE, 2ND BLOCK, BASAVESHWARANAGAR, BENGALORE – 560 079. ...APPELLANT (By Sri ADITYA SONDHI, Sr.COUNSEL FOR Sri K.SURYANARAYANA RAO, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA VIHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY 2. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE VIKASA SOUDHA, VEEDHANA VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 3. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD 5TH FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVAN, BENGALURU – 560 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 4. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-2 KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, 5TH FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001.
5. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009.
6. THE TAHASILDAR BENGALURU NORTH (ADDL.) TALUK, YELAHANKA, BENGALURU - 560 064.
... RESPONDENTS (By Sri S.S.MAHENDRA, AGA FOR R1, R2, R5 & R6;
Sri BASAVARAJ V.SABARAD, ADVOCATE FOR R3 & R4) THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 09/04/2018 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P.
49813/2017 AND FURTHER BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE SAID WRIT PETITION BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT APPEAL WITH COSTS THROUGHOUT.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsels on both sides.
2. Aggrieved by the order dated 09.04.2018 dismissing the Writ Petition No.49813 of 2017, the petitioner has filed this writ appeal.
3. The plea of the writ petitioner was to quash the Preliminary Notification dated 07.08.2006 issued by the second respondent, primarily on the ground that even after 11 years, a Final Notification has not been issued and therefore, the proceedings are deemed to have lapsed.
4. The learned single Judge in Paragraph No.4 of the order held that unless the Final Notification is issued, no cause of action arises to the petitioner and the land owners. This, we find is an error. The entire petition is based on delay and that the delay would result in the Scheme having been lapsed and the acquisition proceedings should therefore be set aside. Therefore, we are of the view that, holding that no cause of action arises to the petitioner is an error committed by the learned single Judge. The non-issuance of a Final Notification, clearly indicate that the Scheme has lapsed, therefore a cause of action to file the petition. Therefore, it is held that the petitioner has a cause of action to maintain the petition. Consequently, the appeal is liable to be allowed.
5. Accordingly, the writ appeal is allowed. The order dated 09.04.2018 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.49813 of 2017 is set aside. The matter is required to be reconsidered afresh by the learned single Judge on merits and in accordance with law.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE DH