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.No.23506/2017 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN SRI NARASIMHAMURTHY, S/O RANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT THIPPEDASARAHALLI VILLAGE, KORA HOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK- 571 202. ... PETITIONER (By Sri N.JAGADISH BALIGA, ADV.) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SERETARY, DEPT. OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE -01 2. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER & EXECUTIVE MEMBER, KHANIJA BHAVAN, 4 & 5TH FLOOR, RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE-01 3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER NIMZ, THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, I FLOOR, MARUTHI TOWER, NEAR SIT MAIN GATE, TUMKUR 572 103. ... RESPONDENTS (By Sri VIJAYAKUMAR A.PATIL, AGA FOR R1; Sri P.V.CHANDRASHEKAR, ADV. FOR R2 & R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE GENERAL AWARD DTD.20.12.2013 PASSED BY R-3 IN RESPECT OF SY.NO.16/17 MEASURING 0.08.00 GUNTAS, OUT OF WHICH 1 ACRE 35 GUNTAS, SITUATED AT THIPPEDASARAHALLI VILLAGE, KORA HOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT OF PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED VIDE ANNEX-C AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER 1. Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for respondent no.1.
2. Learned Counsel Mr. P.V.Chandrashekar files vakalath for respondent no.3 and undertakes to appear for respondent no.2 as well.
3. Petitioner claims to be the owner of land measuring 8 guntas comprised in Sy.No.16/17 of Thippedasarahalli Village, Kora Hobli, Tumakuru Taluk and District. Land in question was notified for acquisition vide preliminary notification issued under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act (for short, ‘the Act) on 01.12.2009. This was followed by final notification issued under Section 28(4) of the Act on 23.07.2010.
4. A general award has been passed on 20.12.2013.
Challenge in this writ petition is to the said award passed by respondent No.3. Petitioner contends that in respect of similarly placed persons, KIADB has granted higher compensation by acting under Section 29(2) of the Act based on the consent and agreement of land losers. It is in this background, petitioner has approached this Court seeking to quash the general award and for a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner as per Section 29(2) of the Act.
5. Learned counsel for both parties submit that in W.P.No.31238/2016 disposed of on 23.09.2016, this Court, while setting aside the general award, has issued direction to the respondent - Special Land Acquisition Officer therein to consider the case of the petitioner for determination of compensation by way of agreement under Section 29(2) of the Act. Observations made and directions issued therein in paragraph 3 of the order are usefully extracted as under:
“In the circumstances, this petition is allowed. General Award at Annexure-C insofar as it relates to petitioner is quashed. A direction shall ensue to the third respondent – Special Land Acquisition Officer, KIADB, to consider the case of the petitioner for determination of compensation by way of agreement under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act, to be complied with as expeditiously as possible within eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It is made clear that this order is applicable if there is no dispute to title to the immovable property acquired and if there is one, then the general award insofar as petitioner is concerned will stand restored, until the dispute is resolved in favour of the petitioner. The third respondent is permitted withdraw the award amount in relation to the aforesaid land, if deposited in the Civil Court. No costs.”
6. Following the order dated 23.09.2016 passed in W.P.No.31238/2016, this writ petition is also disposed of in similar terms.
7. Writ petition is allowed. General award dated 20.12.2013 passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer is set aside insofar as petitioner is concerned. Respondents are directed to determine the compensation by way of agreement under Section 29(2) of the Act, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Compensation shall be paid to the petitioner, if there is no dispute with regard to title to the land in question. If there is any such dispute, then the general award will stand restored. Respondent No.3 – Special Land Acquisition Officer is permitted to withdraw the amount deposited, if any, in the Civil Court, so as to enable him to disburse the same in accordance with law.
8. Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within three weeks from today.
9. Learned Counsel Mr. P.V.Chandrashekar appearing for respondent no.2 is permitted to file vakalath within two weeks from today.
Sd/- JUDGE KK