Next > IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA WRIT PETITION No.36230/2015 (LA-RES) C/W W.P. No.37289/2015 (LA-UDA) IN W.P. No.36230/2015 BETWEEN:
SRI M.A. SUDHIR KUMAR S/O. LATE M.S. ANANTHARAJAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.565, BUDHA MARGA, SIDDARTHA NAGARA, MYSORE – 570 011. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI: B.N. SURESH BABU, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE – 560 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
2. THE UNDER SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE – 560 001.
3. THE COMMISSIONER, MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JANSILAKSHMIBAI ROAD, MYSORE – 570 005.
4. THE MEMBER, TOWN PLANNING AUTHORITY, MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JANSILAKSHMIBAI ROAD, MYSORE – 570 005.
5. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JANSILAKSHMIBAI ROAD, MYSORE – 570 005. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: G.B. SHARATH GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R-3 TO R-5; SRI VIJAYA KUMAR A. PATIL, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR R-1 & R-2) ***** THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DTD.18.6.2015 VIDE ANNX-J AND DIRECT RESPONDENTS TO SANCTION THE LAYOUT PLAN IN RESPECT OF THE LAND IN QUESTION AND ETC., IN W.P.No.37289/2015 BETWEEN:
SRI R. NARASIMHA MURTHY S/O. L. RAMAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT 1ST MAIN, MUNESHWARANAGARA (NEAR STADIUM), KOLAR – 563 101. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI: SURESH BABU B.N., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE – 560 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
2. THE UNDER SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE – 560 001.
3. THE COMMISSIONER, MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JANSILAKSHMIBAI ROAD, MYSORE – 570 005.
4. THE MEMBER, TOWN PLANNING AUTHORITY, MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JANSILAKSHMIBAI ROAD, MYSORE – 570 005.
5. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JANSILAKSHMIBAI ROAD, MYSORE – 570 005. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: VIJAYA KUMAR A. PATIL, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR R-1 & R-2; SRI G.B. SHARATH GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R-3 TO R-5) ***** THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DTD 30.05.2014 VIDE ANNX-G AND DIRECT RESPONDENTS TO SANCTION THE LAYOUT PLAN IN RESPECT OF THE LAND IN QUESTION AND ETC., THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARIN IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Though these matters are listed for preliminary hearing in ‘B’ group, with consent of learned counsel on both sides, they are heard finally.
2. Petitioner in W.P.No.36230/15 is stated to be the owner of land bearing Sy.Nos.228/1 measuring 4 acres, Sy.No.228/6 (old Sy.No.228/2), measuring 1 acre 8 guntas. Whereas, petitioner in W.P.No.37289/15 is stated to be the owner of Sy.Nos.67/2 and 67/3, both lands adjacent to each other, in all measuring 29.5 guntas. Lands bearing aforesaid survey numbers are situated at Bogadi Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk and District. Petitioners have assailed Preliminary Notification dated 10/07/1992, issued by the fourth respondent, under the provisions of the Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act, 1987 (hereinafter, referred to as “the Act”, for the sake of brevity), published in the Official Gazette on 16/07/1992 (Annexure-C) and Final Notification dated 19/03/1996, issued by the first respondent and published in the Karnataka Official Gazette on 25/07/1996 (Annexure “D”). They have also sought a declaration that acquisition proceedings of respondent No.2, pertains to Bogadi village, 3rd Stage Extension Layout, on account of there being no further action taken pursuant to the final notification referred to above.
3. Learned counsel for petitioners and learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submit at the Bar that similar writ petitions have been allowed and it has been declared that the scheme of acquisition of land in respect of the land in question has been declared as having been lapsed. Reference is made to the order passed by this Court in M.S. Sheshadri vs. State of Karnataka, W.P.Nos.51253-254/2015, disposed of on 03/12/2015. They further submit that a similar order may be made in the instant case and writ petitions may be allowed.
4. In the aforesaid order, this Court has noted that subsequent to the final notification, no award has been made, compensation has not been paid, possession has not been taken, scheme has not been implemented and that the respondent – MUDA, has virtually abandoned the scheme. In the circumstances, in the aforesaid order, this Court has held that the scheme stands lapsed insofar as petitioners’ land therein is concerned. Consequently, the aforesaid writ petitions have been allowed by declaring that the scheme for acquisition of land in question has lapsed. Since the land in question is also situated in the very same village and it is the subject matter of the very same notifications, a similar order is passed in these writ petitions also.
5. In the circumstances, these writ petitions are allowed. It is declared that the scheme for acquisition of the land in question has lapsed.
Next >