IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.32195/2019 (LA – RES) BETWEEN :
SRI B. HARINDRANATH SINGH S/O B K SHYAM SINGH AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, R/AT SINGHALLI VILLAGE, JALA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH (ADDL) TALUK BANGALORE-560064 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI SANDEEP LAHIRI, ADV.) AND :
1 . THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, NO.14/3, RASTROTHANA PARISHATH BUILDING WEST WING, 1ST FLOOR, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE-560001 2 . THE TAHSILDAR BANGALORE NORTH (ADDL) TALUK YELAHANKA, SATELLITE TOWN BANGALORE-560064 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B.B.PATIL, ADV. FOR R-1; SRI NITHYANANDA K.R., HCGP FOR R-2.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 25.04.2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE R-1 TO DEPOSIT THE AMOUNT AND MAKE REFERENCE OF THE SUBJECT MATTER UNDER SECTION 30 AND 31 OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT BEFORE THE JURISDICTIONAL CIVIL COURT.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R The petitioner is moving from pillar to post to get the compensation relating to the acquisition of land in question by the Government of Karnataka for the purpose of industrial development under the provisions of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966. (‘Act’ for short).
2. This is the third round of litigation. The petitioner is approaching this Court seeking for disbursement of compensation amount before the appropriate Civil Court. The matter having reached finality in W.A. No.6340/2017 (D.D.03/04/2019), the petitioner has filed a representation before the respondent No.1 to deposit compensation amount in terms of the award making a reference under Sections 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 before the jurisdictional Civil Court. The same has remained unconsidered. Hence, the petitioner is constrained to file this writ petition.
3. This Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.6340/2017 has categorically observed that the learned single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No.30053/2014 dated 20/07/2015 has recorded the submission of the respondent No.1 therein KIADB, that if the time is extended by four weeks, reference under Section 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, would be made to the jurisdictional Civil Court for depositing the amount of compensation. Based on the said submission, the writ petition was dismissed.
4. Despite the same, with the delay of 790 days, the writ appeal was preferred by the KIADB challenging the order of the learned single Judge. In that context, the Division Bench has held that the conduct of the respondent –authority is nothing but an abuse of process of the Court and accordingly dismissed the appeal. Suffering such an order by the Division Bench, the respondent – authority has not acted upon the representation submitted by the petitioner. Such inaction of the respondent – authority is highly deprecated.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondent No.1 is directed to consider the representation dated 25/04/2019 at Annexure-A and consequently deposit the amount making a reference of the subject matter under Sections 30 and 31 of the Act, before the jurisdictional Civil Court in an expedite manner, in any event, not later than four weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Msu Sd/- JUDGE