IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION NOs.11397-11401 OF 2018 & 11623-11624 OF 2018(KLR-RES) BETWEEN:
1. Sri.M.Manjunath, S/o Muniyappa, Aged about 53 years, R/at No.504, Behind Govt. School, Ramagondanahalli, Bengaluru-560 066.
2. Sri.V.Gopal, S/o Late Venkatappa, Aged about 62 years, R/at No.544, Venkateshwara Temple Road, Ramagondanahalli, Bengaluru-560 066.
3. Sri.Muniraju, S/o Muniswamy, Aged about 34 years, R/at No.376, 1st Cross, Ramagondanahalli, Bengaluru-560 066.
4. Sri. Venkatesh, S/o Balakrishna, Aged about 23 years, R/at: No.490, Behind Govt. School, Ramagondanahalli, Bengaluru-560 066.
5. Sri.V.Manjunath, S/o Venkatesh, Aged about 34 years, R/at: No.652, Ramagondanahalli, Bengaluru-560 066.
6. Sri.J.Nagaraj, S/o Late Jayaramappa, Aged about 50 years, R/at: No.652, Ramagondanahalli, Bengaluru-560 066.
7. Sri.M.Nagaraj, S/o Late Muniyappa, Aged about 45 years, R/at: No.540, Venkateshwara Temple Road, Ramagondanahalli, Bengaluru-560 066. … PETITIONERS (BY Sri C.S.Vinod, Advocate) AND:
1. The State of Karnataka, Represented by:
The Secretary, Revenue Department, Multi-Storied Buildings, K.R.Circle, Bengaluru-560 001.
2. The Chief Engineer, Minor Irrigation Department (South), KPWD Building, K.R.Circle, Nrupathunga Road, Sampangi Rama Nagar, Bengaluru-560 001.
3. The Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District, DC Office Building, Kandhaya Bhavana, K.G.Road, Bengaluru-560 009.
4. The Tahsildar, Bengaluru East Taluk, K.R.Pura, Bengaluru-560 036. … RESPONDENTS (BY Sri. Venkatesh Dodderi, AGA) These Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned orders passed by the Tahsildar, Bengaluru East Taluk, i.e., R-4 in Official Memorandum dated: 20.01.2018 vide annexure-E.
These Writ Petitions coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER The petitioners herein are claiming themselves to be the owners of several bits and pieces of land, which are used for laying of Water pipelines from Varthur Lake to Narasapura Lake, Kolar District, passing through the lands of the petitioners.
2. The grievance of the petitioners is that they are all holders of small extents of land and out of that a major portion is taken away by the respondents for laying the pipeline.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the pipelines which were laid by the authorities are huge and are in the range of 10 feet in radius. In this background, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that, when such huge sized pipes are laid, large extent of land would be lost permanently, therefore the respondents are required to consider granting reasonable compensation for acquiring the land of the petitioners. Though the learned Additional Government Advocate state that the said pipes would be laid below the ground level therefore, there is no impediment to carry on agricultural activity on the said land, the same is opposed by the Counsel for the petitioners contending that once pipeline is laid, the said land will not be permanently available for cultivation. Hence, it is stated that the proceedings before the Tahsildar is not properly conducted and the order passed by him vide Annexure ‘E’ is not sustainable in the eye of law as the same is without due process of acquisition of the land in question.
4. It is also stated that the provisions of Section 90(a) of the Land Revenue Act, 1964 (‘Act’ for short), i.e., construction of water channel through the land of another cannot be invoked for a project of this magnitude as if a small portion of land is utilized to lay a small pipe below the ground level and to claim that the same would not affect the right of the petitioners to carry out agricultural activity. It is also contended that at no point of time, the petitioners have objected for implementation of the project pending consideration of the order for granting compensation.
5. Hence, it is prayed that the impugned order under challenge in this proceeding may be set aside and the matter may be remanded to the fourth respondent-Tahsildar to hold an enquiry and to identify the extent of land that is utilized by the authorities for the purpose of laying pipelines and thereafter to take proper steps for granting compensation.
6. At this juncture, learned AGA would submit that under similar circumstances, several similar petitions have been filed and have already been disposed of by reserving liberty to the parties to approach the Assistant Commissioner by filing an appeal. The order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench is also placed before this Court. However, on going through the same, it is clearly seen that it is a cyclostyled order in just indicating the petitioners to follow the procedure that is required to be followed while challenging the order impugned instead of approaching this Court by filing the writ petitions. However, it is seen that in the said writ petitions whether the grounds in the present writ petitions are raised for consideration or not, is not forthcoming. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that repeating the same order in these proceedings may not be to the benefit of the petitioners herein and others who are similarly placed.
7. At this juncture, this Court enquired with the learned AGA that, if the matter is referred to be taken up before the Assistant Commissioner, whether he would be able to hold an enquiry in this behalf. For the said query, the learned AGA fairly submitted that the Assistant Commissioner being an appellate authority, cannot be expected to hold an enquiry. In all probabilities he would be referring the matter to the Tahsildar to consider the case of the petitioners by holding fresh enquiry. Therefore it is felt that, when the Assistant Commissioner is not the authority to hold an enquiry, there is no purpose in directing the petitioners to approach him and thereafter to give him the option of either sending it to Tahsildar for holding an enquiry or to dispose of the appeal on reappreciating the order.
8. The prayer of the petitioners appear to be correct, the order impugned is required to be set aside. Accordingly, by quashing the order impugned, the matter is remanded to the Tahsildar to call for detailed objections from the petitioners, thereafter to hold an enquiry and to take a decision whether to proceed with the matter by invoking Section 90(a) of the Act or in the alternative to acquire the land for the project specified and thereafter to pay the compensation to them. While doing so, the Tahsildar is required to pass a detailed order without taking a shortcut method of stating considered and rejected as is done usually to get over the direction of this Court.
9. With such observations, these writ petitions are disposed of. Since larger interest of majority of the land owners, whose lands are taken in similar fashion, their prayer also requires to be considered by this Court and would direct the 4th respondent – Tahsildar to consider the application of others also who are similarly placed and take up all the matters of similarly placed persons for hearing on 28.2.2019.
10. The petitioners shall appear before the 4th respondent – Tahsildar on 28.2.2019 without waiting for notice.
11. It is also made clear that this order is not only beneficial to the petitioners herein, but it is applicable to the other similarly placed persons.
Learned AGA is permitted to file his memo of appearance within two weeks from today.
Sd/- JUDGE cp*