IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION No.46665/2019 (LB-BMP) c/w WRIT PETITION No.46653/2019 (LB-BMP) W.P.No.46665/2019 Between:
M/s. Steerwell Holdings, A Patnership Firm Duly constituted under the India Partnership Act Represented by its Partners 1. Mrs. Usha Subramanian W/o Late Mr. B. Subramanian, Aged about 60 years.
2. Mr. Aditya Subramanian, S/o Late Mr. B. Subramanian, Aged about 34 years.
3. Ms. Rhea Subramanian, D/o Late Mr. B. Subramanian, Aged about 27 years.
Petitioners No.1 to 4 are Residing at No.1434, Embassy Habitat, Vasanth Nagar, Bangalore – 560 052. … Petitioners (By Sri D.N. Manjunath, Advocate) And:
1. State of Karnataka, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Urban Department, Vidhana Soudha, Vidhana Veedhi, Bengaluru – 560 001.
2. Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka, Room No.320, 3rd Floor, Vidhana Soudha, Bengaluru – 560 001.
3. Ministry of Urban Development, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Vidhana Soudha, Vidhana Veedhi, Bengaluru – 560 001.
4. Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Urban Development Department, Room No.436, Vikasa Soudha, Bangalore – 560 001.
5. Joint Director (Planning) Urban Development Department, Room No.431, Vikasa Soudha, Bangalore – 560 001.
6. Additional Chief Secretary, Finance Department, Vidhana Soudha, Bengaluru – 560 001.
7. Director, Town Planning Department, Number 04, M.S. Building Ground Floor, Near Vidhana Soudha, Bengaluru – 560 001.
8. Commissioner, BBMP, Corporation Head Office Control, N.R. Square, Bengaluru – 560 002.
9. Office of the Chief Executive Engineer, Project Central Division – II, BBMP, N.R. Square, Bangalore – 560 002. … Respondents (By Smt. Prathima Honnapura, AGA for R1 to R7; Sri K.V. Mohan Kumar, Advocate for R8 & R9) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of certiorari as against the respondents and in particular the respondents eight and nine, the Commissioner and Chief Executive Engineer Project II by holding the modified drawing dated 2.8.2017 denoting the property of the petitioner as Sl. No.4, LA2, under land acquisition statement as per Annexure-K in the drawing as illegal, arbitrary and more so contrary to the provisions right to fair compensation and transparency in land acquisition and Rehabilitation & Resettlement Act hence is vitiated, unsustainable and without jurisdiction and etc.
W.P.No.46653/2019 Between:
Mrs. Sneha Pai, W/o Late Sanjay K. Pai, No.106, 1st Floor, “Uma Ganapathy Apartments”, 8th Main, Near 13th Cross, Malleswaram, Bangalore – 560 003.
(By Sri D.N. Manjunath, Advocate) And:
… Petitioner 1. State of Karnataka, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Urban Department, Vidhana Soudha, Vidhana Veedhi, 3rd Floor, Bengaluru – 560 001.
2. Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka, Room No.320, 3rd Floor, Vidhana Soudha, Bengaluru – 560 001.
3. Ministry of Urban Development, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Vidhana Soudha, Vidhana Veedhi, Bengaluru – 560 001.
4. Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Urban Development Department, Room No.436, Vikasa Soudha, Bangalore – 560 001.
5. Joint Director (Planning) Urban Development Department, Room No.431, Vikasa Soudha, Bangalore – 560 001.
6. Additional Chief Secretary, Finance Department, Vidhana Soudha, Bengaluru – 560 001.
7. Director, Town Planning Department, Number 04, M.S. Building 4th floor, 6th Floor, Near Vidhana Soudha, Bengaluru – 560 001.
8. Commissioner, BBMP, Corporation Head Office Control, N.R. Square, Bengaluru – 560 002.
9. Office of the Chief Executive Engineer, Project Central Division – II, BBMP, N.R. Square, Bangalore – 560 002. … Respondents (By Smt. Prathima Honnapura, AGA for R1 to R7; Sri K.V. Mohan Kumar, Advocate for R8 & R9) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of certiorari as against the respondents and in particular the respondents eight and nine, the Commissioner and Chief Executive Engineer Project II by holding the modified drawing dated 2.8.2017 denoting the property of the petitioner as Sl.No.4, LA2, under land acquisition statement as per Annexure-F in the drawing as illegal, arbitrary and more so contrary to the provisions right to fair compensation and transparency in land acquisition and Rehabilitation & Resettlement Act hence is vitiated, unsustainable and without jurisdiction and etc.
These Writ Petitions coming on for preliminary hearing this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioners stating to be the owners of immovable properties bearing Municipal No.1, BBMP P.I.D.No.77-92-1, Kumarapark Extension (East), Bengaluru have filed the present writ petitions seeking for quashing of modified drawing bearing DWG No.NC/MVR/BBMP/SHIVANANDA/GAD/SD-01 dated 02.08.2017, whereby the properties of the petitioners are found at Sl.No.4.
2. The petitioners have also sought for issuance of a direction to the respondents to follow the procedure as contemplated under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and to consider the representations of the petitioners at Annexures-M and N in W.P.Nos.46665/2019 and W.P.No.46653/2019 respectively and have also sought for other reliefs.
3. The petitioners contend that the respondent – BBMP intends to make use of the properties of the petitioners as revealed in the modified drawings (Annexure-K in W.P.No.46665/2019 and Annexure-F in W.P.No.46653/2019) with respect to Project-II Grade Separator at Shivananda Circle.
4. Upon notice, learned counsel appearing for respondent – BBMP submits that the final design with respect to proposed project of respondent – BBMP is still to be approved and the modified drawings at Annexures-K and F have been forwarded to the Government for necessary approval.
5. The above facts not being in dispute, learned counsel for the respondent states that in the event, the properties of the petitioners is to be made use of for the purpose of project, the rights of the petitioners would be acquired in accordance with law relating to acquisition.
6. Learned counsel for the respondent – BBMP also submits that liberty be reserved to acquire the properties through direct negotiations, if circumstances are so made out.
7. Recording such submission and noting that the drawings at Annexures-K and F have not yet been finally approved, the petitions are premature. Accordingly, these petitions are disposed.
8. Needless to state that in the event, the properties of the petitioners are sought to be made use of, the respondent – BBMP would take steps for acquiring the rights of the petitioners in accordance with law and in light of the observations made above. All contentions of parties are kept open.
Sd/- JUDGE VGR