IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2017 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA WRIT PETITION Nos.48599 – 48600/2014 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN:
1. SMT.VIJAYLAKSHMI W/O SRI LATE KRISHNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, R/AT NO.440, 6TH MAIN ROAD, H.A.L.3RD STAGE, BANGALORE-560075 2. SRI K.SANTOSH S/O L ATE SRI KRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/AT NO.440, 6TH MAIN ROAD, H.A.L. 3RD STAGE, BANGALORE-560075 ... PETITIONERS [By SRI P.B.RAJU, ADV.] AND:
1. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO.3/2, 3RD FLOOR, 1ST CROSS, THIMMAIAH TOWERS, GANDHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560009 2. THE SPECIAL LAND & ACQUISITION OFFICER KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO.3/2, 3RD FLOOR, 1ST CROSS, THIMMAIAH TOWER, GANDHINAGAR BANGALORE-560009 3. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY, VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001, REP. BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY …RESPONDENTS [By SRI VIJAY KUMAR A. PATIL, ADV. FOR R-1 & R-2; SRI V.SHIVAREDDY, HCGP FOR R-3.) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THAT THE DE-NOTIFICATION OF THE PETITIONER'S LAND VIDE ANN-F, DATED 28.10.2010, ENURES TO THE BENEFIT OF THE PETITIONERS TO THE ENTIRE EXTENT OF 36 GUNTAS AND 1 ACRE 2 GUNTAS IN SY.NO.13 AND 12 OF YENDRIKAYA VILLAGE, NARASAPURA HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT AND TO DIRECT THE R-1 KIADB TO ISSUE APPROPRIATE ORDERS IN THIS REGARD THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R These Writ Petitions are listed for Preliminary Hearing ‘B’ Group along with I.A. No.1/2017 for early hearing of the Writ Petitions.
2. Petitioners have in substance sought a declaration that Notification issued under Section 4 of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for the sake of brevity] in respect of Sy. Nos.12 and 13 of Yendrikaya Village, Narsapura Hobli, Kolar Taluk and District, pertaining to petitioners’ lands, to the entire extent of their lands and not to the extent only mentioned in the said Notification. Consequently, Petitioners have sought a direction to the respondents to issue a Corrigendum/‘No objection Certificate’ to the Petitioners to utilize the entire extent of their lands and a further direction is sought to consider the representations dated 03.06.2013 and 19.12.2013.
3. Briefly stated the facts are that petitioners claim to have purchased 1 acre 2 guntas in Sy. No.12 on 23.10.2003 and 36 guntas in Sy. No.13 on 6.11.1995 under registered sale deeds. The State acting under section 28[1] of the Act issued Preliminary Notification on 11.12.2009 intending to acquire 3 acres 15 guntas in Sy. No.12 and 2 acres 37 guntas in Sy.
No.13 including aforesaid extent belonging to Petitioners. Thereafter, enquiry was conducted under section 28]3] of the Act and report was submitted by Special Land Acquisition Officer through the State. Subsequently, final Notification and Declaration was issued under Section 28]4] of the Act on 26.10.2010. Copies of these documents are found at Annexures-R1, R3 and R2 respectively. On the date Declaration and Final Notification was issued, a Notification under Section 4 of the Act was also issued, a copy of which is at Annexure-R5, intending to exclude 35 guntas in Sy.No.12 and 20 guntas in Sy.No.13 belonging to Petitioners, the implication being that there was no complete exclusion of lands sought to be acquired from Petitioners. Subsequently, Petitioners have been seeking permission to develop their entire extent of lands notified i.e., beyond what has been excluded under Section 4 of the Act. The grievance of Petitioners is that there has been no Notification issued by way of Corrigendum or by way of fresh Notification to exclude the entire extent of 1.2 acres in Sy.No.12 and 36 guntas in Sy.No.13. In that regard, W.P. No.30698/2011 along with W.P. No.30699/2011 was filed before this Court by Petitioners herein. Those writ petitions were disposed of on 03.02.2012, on the basis of the submissions made by learned Counsel for first Respondent to the effect that entire extent of lands belonging to petitioners sought to be acquired would be excluded although Annexure-R5 Notification was only a partial exclusion of petitioners’ lands. Based on that submission, writ petitions were disposed. There being no further action taken by Respondents, Petitioners have filed these Writ Petitions, virtually seeking a declaration that the Notification issued under Section 4 of the Act dated 26.10.2010 [Annexure-R5] is applicable to the entire extent of 1.2 acres in Sy.No.12 and 36 guntas in Sy.No.13.
4. I have heard learned Counsel for Petitioners, learned Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and learned Government Pleader for the State and perused the material on record.
5. On perusal of Annexures-R1, R2 and R5 conjointly, it becomes apparent that the State issued a Notification under Section 4 of the Act seeking to exclude only 35 guntas in Sy. No.12 and 20 guntas in Sy. No.13. But, petitioners are aggrieved by the entire extent of the notified areas not being excluded under the said Notification. Their grievance has become an exasperation on account of the stand taken by Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 before this Court in the Writ Petitions petitioners had filed earlier, referred to above. In fact, in these Writ Petitions this Court, by Order dated 1.7.2015 had chastised Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein and had passed strictures against Counsel appearing for the said respondents as also the Deponent who verified the statement of objections. However, the said order was appealed against by Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein in W.A. Nos.2023-2024/2015 and the Division Bench of this Court, by Order dated 10.4.2017 has set aside the strictures passed by learned Single Judge against learned Counsel and Deponent, but while doing so, the Division Bench permitted the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein to file a fresh statement of objections, but they were not permitted to withdraw any admissions made in the earlier statement of objections. In view of the observations and directions of the Division Bench of this Court, learned Counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Respondents must be pinned down to their admissions that they had made in the statement of objections filed earlier and to act in accordance with the said admissions.
6. Learned Counsel further points out that there have been correspondence and recommendations made for de-notifying entire extent of lands belonging to Petitioners sought to be acquired and therefore a direction may be issued to the State to issue a Corrigendum notification in that regard.
7. However, learned Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 would submit that it is for the State to issue such a Notification under Section 4 of the Act and any clarification to be sought by the State in that regard would be submitted by Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
8. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the State submits that if this Court is to direct consideration of Petitioners’ case, the same would be considered in accordance with law under Section 4 of the Act.
9. In the circumstances, the only direction that could be issued to the Respondent *No.3 is to consider the case of the petitioners having regard to the earlier *Corrected V.C.O. dated 19/01/2018 Notification issued under Section 4 of the Act dated 26.10.2010 and bearing in mind the developments that have occurred in respect of the schedule lands and to pass a speaking order in accordance with law. The said exercise shall be made within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, Writ Petitions are disposed. In view of disposal of Writ Petitions, I.A. No.1/2017 also stands disposed.
Sd/-
JUDGE AN/-