IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.586/2018 (LA - KIADB) BETWEEN:
Sri Mahesh Kumar Jain s/o Sri Shantilal Jain Aged about 43 years No.68, `Nihar Nivas’ Kanakapura Road Basavanagudi Bangalore-560004. ... Petitioner (By Sri Shankaranarayana Rao, Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka Represented by its Secretary Department of Commerce & Industries, M S Building Bangalore-560 001.
2. The Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board, No.14/2 RP Building, Nrupatunga Road Bangalore-560 002 Rep. by its Chief Executive Officer & Executive Member.
3. The Special Land Acquisition Officer-2, Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board No.49, Khanija Bhavan East Wing, 5th Floor Race Course Road Bangalore-560 009.
4. The Bangalore International Airport Limited (BIAL) (A Public Sector Undertaking) Administration Block Kempegowda International Airport, Bangalore-560 300 (Represented by its Managing Director).
5. The Bangalore International Airport Area Planning Authority (BIAPA), Sulibele Road Shanthinagar, Devanahalli Bangalore Rural District PIN – 562110 (Reptd. by its Member – Secretary) …Respondents [By Sri K R Nityananda, HCGP for R1, Sri Ashok N Nayak, Advocate for R2 & R3, Sri Ganapati Hegde, Advocate for R4, Sri Yogesh D Nayak, Advocate for R5) This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct all the respondents to act upon and give effect to survey sketch cum report and spot mahazar dtd:27.11.2010 (Annexure-K and L) and grant all consequential reliefs thereto and etc.
This petition coming on for preliminary hearing in `B’ group this day, the Court made the following:-
O R D E R The petitioner has sought for a direction to respondents to act upon and give effect to `Survey Sketch cum Report’ and `Spot Mahazar’ dated 27.11.2010 vide Annexures-K & L and alternatively direct the respondent Nos.4 and 5 to pay just and fair compensation determined in accordance with the provisions contained in the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 in respect of a portion of land in Sy.No.41 measuring 1 acre 6 guntas situated at Yartiganahalli village, Kasaba Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, Bangalore Rural District.
2. Petitioner claims to be the absolute owner of the property in question. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the said land has not been formed part of the acquisition proceedings or not handed over the same to respondent No.4.
3. The petitioner and Sri G S Shivakumar together submitted a joint representation with a request to implement the survey sketch-cum-reports dated 14.09.2010 and 27.11.2010. In WP No.2364/2016 filed by Sri G S Shivakumar disposed of on 22.3.2017, this Court had directed the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board to consider the representation dated 5.4.2013 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a time frame. Accordingly, respondent No.3 has issued an endorsement dated 2.8.2017, wherein it is categorically stated that the subject land has not been acquired by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board.
4. In such circumstances, the petitioner is seeking for a direction to the respondents to act upon and give effect to survey sketch-cum-report and spot mahazar dated 27.11.2010, wherein it is indicated that the land measuring 1 acre 6 guntas in Sy.No.41, the subject land has been encroached by respondent No.5 – Bangalore International Airport Area Planning Authority and compound is also constructed.
5. Learned counsel for the KIADB would submit that the property in question is not acquired by the Board.
6. Learned counsel appearing for respondents No.4 and 5 would submit that they were not parties to the survey conducted in the year 2010. The * KSIIDCL is the lessor and the land to an extent of 4008 acres has been leased out in favour of respondent No.5 for a period of 30 years renewable by further period of 30 years in terms of consent agreement executed by the * KSIIDCL. Learned counsel disputes the encroachment alleged by the petitioner.
* Corrected vide chamber order dated 10.01.2020.
7. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the property in question is not part of lease deed said to have been executed by* KSIIDCL.
8. Having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record, it is apparent that during November, 2010, no survey was conducted in the presence of respondent No.4. In order to provide an opportunity to all the stake holders, it is appropriate to direct the respondent * No.3 to conduct the survey of the land in Sy. Nos.40 and 41 of Yartiganahalli village, Devanahalli Taluk, Bangalore District after notifying all the stake holders. The compliance shall be made by respondent * No.3 in an expedite manner in any event not later than three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. The petitioner as well as other stakeholders shall co-operate for joint survey to be conducted by respondent * No.3. Consequently, the * Corrected vide chamber order dated 10.01.2020.
respondents shall act upon and give effect to the said survey report in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, writ petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Bkm