IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL W.P.Nos.26711-714/2017(LA-KIADB) BETWEEN 1. SRI B.R.ASHWATHANARAYANA RAO, S/O RANGALORE RAMIAH AGED ABOUT 88 YEARS 2. Dr B.A.MAHESH S/O B.R.ASHWATHANARAYANA RAO AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 3. SMT.A.SHARADA W/O DR B A MAHESH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 4. B.M.ADITI RAO D/O DR B A MAHESH AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT NO 640, 1ST MAIN ROAD, 1ST STAGE, INDIRANAGARA, BENGALURU – 560038. ... PETITIONERS (By Smt. MAMATHA M.R., ADV.) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE M S BUILDING BENGALURU - 560001 REP BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD (KIADB) NO 49, 4TH AND 5TH FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVANA RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560001 REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
3. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD (BMICP) NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BENGALURU - 560001 REP BY ITS SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER – 2. ... RESPONDENTS (By Sri VIJAYA KUMAR A.PATIL, AGA FOR R1; Sri B.B.PATIL, ADV. FOR R2 & R3) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION DATED 21.7.1999 VIDE ANNEX-J ISSUED UNDER SEC. 28(1) OF THE KIADB ACT, BY R-2 AS LAPSED / ABANDONED IN SO FAR AS SCHEDULE PROPERTIES; AND TO DIRECT RESPONDENTS HEREIN TO FORBEAR FROM ACQUIRING THE SCHEDULE PROPERTIES SITUATED IN KANNAMANGALA VILLAGE CHENNAPATTANA TALUK, BELONGING TO THE PETITIONERS AND ETC.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER 1. A short question arises for consideration in this writ petition. Hence, though the matter is listed for preliminary hearing, the same is taken up for final disposal with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.
2. Petitioners are the absolute owners of petition schedule three items of properties which are described in Schedule-A to C appended to the memorandum of writ petition. They have approached this Court seeking a declaration that preliminary notification dated 21.07.1999 issued under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (for short, ‘the Act’) by the State Government proposing to acquire the land for the benefit of respondent no.3, has been abandoned in so far as it pertained to petition schedule properties. A direction is also sought against the respondents not to proceed with the acquisition proceedings of the lands in question.
3. Main ground on which the aforesaid reliefs are sought is, that respondents have no right to proceed with the acquisition proceedings at such belated stage after lapse of nearly 18 years from the date of issuance of preliminary notification on 21.07.1999. Petitioner has produced copy of the preliminary notification at Annexure-
J. The land was proposed to be acquired for industrial purpose.
4. It is not in dispute that after the preliminary notification was issued, the same has not been followed by final notification under Section 28(4) of the Act. Indeed, this is evident from the endorsement issued by the Special Land Acquisition Officer-II, KIADB (BMICP), Bengaluru, dated 01.04.2017 produced at Annexure-K. The said communication is issued in response to the information sought under the Right to Information Act by one of the petitioners – petitioner no.2. It is stated therein that neither final notification under Section 28(4) of the Act was issued nor any award had been passed. In such circumstances, it is evident that respondent no.1 – State and the beneficiaries have not proceeded with the acquisition proceedings. They have abandoned the same. They cannot be now permitted to proceed with the acquisition proceedings initiated in the year 1999, as otherwise, it will affect the right of the petitioners to seek just and fair compensation because compensation to be determined would be always pegged to the date of issuance of preliminary notification under Section 28(1) of the Act.
5. In view of the above, as held by this Court in catena of decisions, the State and its authorities cannot exercise its power to acquire the land in an unreasonable manner. They are required to act reasonably in discharging their duties. Be it the question of issuance of final declaration or passing of the award and payment of compensation. Reasonable exercise of power necessary involves exercise of power within a reasonable period. Therefore, in the instant case, 17 years have lapsed since the date of issuance of preliminary notification. So far final notification has not been issued. Hence, this is a clear case of abandonment of the process initiated for acquisition. Hence, petitioners are entitled to succeed.
6. The writ petition is, therefore, allowed. It is declared that the acquisition proceedings initiated vide preliminary notification dated 21.07.1999 in so far as the petition schedule properties are concerned, have been abandoned. Therefore, the said notification cannot in any manner affect the said lands.
Sd/- JUDGE KK