IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION Nos.16249-16251/2019 (LB-RES) BETWEEN:
Sri.Jain Swethambar Temple Trust, Roopa Vani Road, Chitradurga – 577501. Represented by its, Trustee, Sri.Pruthviraj, Aged about 65 years, S/o Pukaraj.
…Petitioner (By Sri. Chandrashekar.P.V, Advocate) AND:
1. The State of Karnataka, Public Works Department, Vikas Soudha, Dr.Ambedkar Veedhi, Benagaluru – 560001.
Represented by its Principal Secretary.
2. The Deputy Commissioner, Chitradurga Disstrict, Chitradurga – 577501.
3. The Assistant Commissioner, Chitradurga Sub-Division, Chitradurga – 577501.
4. The Assistant Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Chitradurga Sub-Division, Chitradurga – 577501.
5. The City Municipal Council, Chitradurga – 577501, Represented by its Commissioner.
...Respondents (By Sri.M.A.Subramani, HCGP for R1 to R4; Sri S. Mahesh, Advocate for R5) These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct restrain the respondents from interfering with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the schedule properties in any manner including the demolishing of the structure standing in thereon or utilization of the schedule properties, other than through due process of law.
These Petitions coming on for Preliminary hearing this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The petitioner stating to be the owner in possession and enjoyment of the commercial property situated alongside Bengaluru – Dharwad Road (BD Road), Chitradurga has filed this writ petition seeking for appropriate directions against the respondents, which include the Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner as well as City Municipal Council, from interfering with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of its property, except in accordance with due process of law.
2. The learned High Court Government Pleader and learned counsel appearing for the respondents state that they have been following due process of law in all cases and the matter of road widening has been dealt with in earlier writ petitions and directions have been passed, including Writ Petition Nos.50600-50602/2014 (LA-RES) and the said directions are being adhered to.
3. Heard learned counsel appearing for both the sides. In view of undisputed facts, after hearing both the sides, the matter is considered as below:-
The proposal to widen Bengaluru-Dharwad Road by the respondents is sought to be implemented. Insofar as private rights of the petitioner, who rely on their documents of title, the same is a matter to be taken note of by the respondent Authorities. However, it is the contention of respondents that in many of the cases, the petitioners have encroached upon public property including the road and hence, are not entitled to the reliefs as sought for.
For the purpose of a settled procedure to carry out the activity of road widening, the following procedure is prescribed:-
(a) Notice is to be issued to the petitioner and the notice must prescribe necessary details, including the extent of the property of the petitioner that is required for the proposed road widening activity, calling upon the petitioner to submit the documents of title and other records relating to ownership and enjoyment of the property. The respondent Authorities to conduct an appropriate enquiry under Section 82 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 (‘the Act’ for brevity), if it is found that there is a claim by the respondent Authorities as regards the property of the petitioner.
(b) After the statutory enquiry, in the event, the petitioner is found to have encroached the public properties, reasonable time to avail of the legal redressal could be granted before action is taken by the respondent Authorities in accordance with the enquiry concluded in terms of Section 82 of the Act. In the event, the property is found to be private property, the respondents are directed to acquire rights in accordance with Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 or in accordance with any other law as may be applicable with respect to acquisition of rights and interests of the property of the petitioner.
(c) It is also open to the respondent Authorities if they so decide to acquire rights through outright purchase through negotiations with the property owners in accordance with the procedure prescribed relating to the purchase of private properties.
(d) It is also observed that the respondent Authorities are required to take note of the provisions contained in Chapter-IX of the Act relating to prescribing of building lines. If such building lines have not yet been prescribed, necessary steps to be taken.
4. The above directions are passed taking note of the order dated 23.03.2016 passed by this Court in Writ Petition Nos.50600-50602/2014 (LA-RES), as well as the judgment dated 18.03.2019 passed by Division Bench in Writ Appeal Nos.4296-4299/2015 and 4300-4303/2015 and further, the directions passed in Writ Petition Nos.30738-30757/2018 and connected petitions vide order dated 14.01.2019.
5. Subject to the above observations, this writ petition is disposed of, reserving liberty to the respondent Authorities to take necessary action in accordance with law and in light of the observations made hereinabove for making use or acquiring the rights and interests of the property of the petitioner.
6. The respondent Authorities are also to keep in mind the procedure prescribed in the Circular dated 23.09.2016 vide No.£ÀCE 28 nJ0r 2016 while resorting to the road widening activity.
Sd/- JUDGE NS