Karnataka High Court
WP/31933/2014 of SMT KEMPAMMA Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 21 April 2026
COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU Dated this the 7th day of September, 2017 PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE P S DINESH KUMAR Writ Petition No.32066 of 2014 and Writ Petition Nos.33584-33586 of 2014 c/w Writ Petition
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
AT BENGALURU
Dated this the 7th day of September, 2017
PRESENT:
THE HON’BLE MR SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHERJEE,
CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE P S DINESH KUMAR
Writ Petition No.32066 of 2014 and
Writ Petition Nos.33584-33586 of 2014
c/w
Writ Petition Nos.31933-31935 of 2014 (LA-BDA)
In Writ Petition No.32066 of 2014 and
Writ Petition Nos.33584-33586 of 2014:
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI.SHAMANNA
S/O LATE JALADA SUBBAIAH
AGED ABOUT 87 YEARS
R/AT No.76, 3RD MAIN ROAD
AMARJYOTHI LAYOUT
CHOLANAGAR
BANGALORE-560 032
2.
SRI.SEERANNA
S/O LATE JALADA SUBBAIAH
AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS
R/AT No.314, 9TH ‘A’ CROSS
JAKKUR POST
3.
SRI.APPANNA
S/O LATE JALADA SUBBAIAH
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS
R/AT No.315, 9TH ‘A’ CROSS
JAKKUR VILLAGE
YELAHANKA HOBLI
BANGALORE-560 064 ...PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI.ANANTH MANDAGI, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SHRI.D.R.RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT, M.S.BUILDINGS
BANGALORE-560 001
2.
THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
KUMARA PARK WEST
BANGALORE-560 020
REPRESENTED BY ITS
COMMISSIONER
3.
THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
KUMARA PARK WEST
BANGALORE-560 020 …RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI.VIVEK HOLLA, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT
PLEADER FOR RESPONDENT No.1;
SHRI.S.VIJAY SHANKAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SHRI.K.KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT Nos.2
AND 3;
SHRI.V.M.LAKSHMIPATHI FOR IMPLEADING APPLICANTS IN
IA No.I/15;
SHRI.H.C.SHIVARAMU FOR IMPLEADING APPLICANT IN IA
No.1/17;
SHRI.P.N.RAJESHWARA FOR IMPLEADING APPLICANT IN IA
No.2/17;
SHRI.L.SUBRAMANI FOR IMPLEADING APPLICANTS IN IA
No.3/17;
SHRI.VENKATESH P.DALWAI FOR IMPLEADING APPLICANT
IN IA No.4/17)
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING
TO DECLARE THAT THE 2ND FINAL NOTIFICATION DTD
18.06.2014 (ANNEXURE-N) AS ULTRAVIRES, ARBITRARY
AND ILLEGAL AND GRANT ALL CONSEQUENTIAL RELIEFS
THERETO AND QUASH THE 2ND FINAL NOTIFICATION
BANGALORE DTD 18.06.2014 (ANNEXURE-N) IN SO FAR AS
IT RELATES TO LANDS IN SURVEY NOS.76/1, 76/4, 85/4 &
OF
JAKKUR
VILLAGE
BELONGING
TO
THE
PETITIONERS AT SL.NOS.844, 847, 862 & 866 OF THE
SCHEDULE APPENDED TO THE NOTIFICATION ETC.,
In Writ Petition Nos.31933-31935 of 2014:
BETWEEN:
1.
SMT.KEMPAMMA
W/O LATE KEMPAIAH
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS
R/O.JAKKUR VILLAGE
YELAHANKA HOBLI
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK
2.
SMT.YASODHA
D/O.SRI.ASWATHNARAYANAN
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
R/AT No.157/8
BASAVESHWAR LAYOUT
BABUSABARA PALYA
BANGALORE SOUTH
BANGALORE-560 060
3.
SMT.VANITA SOMASEKHAR
W/O.SRI.V.M.LAKSHMIPATHI
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
RESIDING AT No.8/3
WEST ANJANEYA TEMPLE STREET
DATTATREYA CROSS ROAD
BASAVANAGUDI
BANGALORE-560 004 ...PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI.B.M.SHYAM PRASAD, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SHRI.N.SHARATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPT. OF HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT
M.S.BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BANGALORE-560 001
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY
2.
KUMARAPARK WEST
BANGALORE-560 020
REPTD. BY IT’S COMMISSIONER
3.
THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK
THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
KUMARAPARK WEST
BANGALORE-560 020
4.
SRI.SHAMANNA
S/O LATE JALADA SUBBAIAH
AGED ABOUT 87 YEARS
RESIDING AT No.76, 3RD MAIN ROAD
AMARJYOTHI LAYOUT
CHOLANAGAR
BANGALORE-560 032
5.
SRI.SEERANNA
S/O LATE JALADA SUBBAIAH
AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS
RESIDING AT No.314
9TH ‘A’ CROSS
JAKKUR (POST)
BANGALORE-560 064
6.
SRI.APPANNA
S/O LATE JALADA SUBBAIAH
RESIDING AT No.315
9TH ‘A’ CROSS
JAKKUR VILLAGE
YALAHANKA HOBLI
BANGALORE-560 064
7.
SRI.S.V.S.SUDHIR BABU
S/O.LAKSHMINARAYANA
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
L 87, 4TH MAIN, 14TH CROSS
BANGALORE-560 034 … RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI.VIVEK HOLLA HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT
PLEADER FOR RESPONDENT No.1;
SHRI.S.VIJAY SHANKAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SHRI.K.KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT Nos.2
AND 3;
SHRI.ANANTH MANDAGI, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SHRI.D.R.RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT
Nos.4 TO 7)
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING
TO DECLARE THAT THE ORDER IN W.P.Nos.5343 TO 5345
AND 5575/2014 DTD.19.2.2014 IS VITIATED BY FRAUD
AND NON-EST IN THE EYE OF LAW VIDE ANNEXURE-A(H)
AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NOT TO ACT UPON THE
ORDER DTD.19.2.2014 PASSED IN W.P.NOS.5343-5345 &
5575/2014 AT ANNEXURE-A(H) ETC.,
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
These writ petitions were clubbed with writ appeals No.1616-19 of 2014 decided on July 17, 2017, as the subject matter in these cases are similar to the one in the said writ appeals.
2. With the consent of the learned advocates for the parties, these petitions are heard for final disposal.
3. Heard Mr.Ananth Mandagi, learned senior advocate for the petitioners in Writ Petitions No.32066 of 2014 and Writ Petitions No.33584-586 of 2014, Mr.B.M.Shyam Prasad, learned senior advocate for the petitioners in Writ Petitions No.31933-35 of 2014, Mr.Vijay Shankar, learned senior advocate for the Bangalore Development Authority, Mr.Vivek Holla, learned High Court Government Pleader for the State and the respective learned advocates in support of applications for impleadment.
4. Writ Petitions No.32066 and 33584-86 of 2014 are filed inter alia with a prayer to quash the notification dated
June 18, 2014 (Annexure-N). The petitioners in these writ petitions shall be referred to as land owners.
5. Writ Petitions No.31933-935 of 2014 are filed by the allottees of sites, challenging the judgment and order dated February 19, 2014, in Writ Petitions No.5343-45 and 5575 of 2014. The petitioners in these writ petitions shall be referred to as allottees.
6. Briefly stated the facts of the case are, certain lands, including the lands belonging to the land owners in these proceedings were acquired for formation of the Arkavathi Layout.
7. This Court in the case of the Commissioner, BDA and others v. State of Karnataka, by its Secretary reported in ILR 2006 KAR 318, upheld the acquisition of the lands for formation of Arkavathi Layout subject to certain conditions. It was, inter alia, provided that the land owners, who were seeking dropping of the acquisition proceedings in respect of their lands, to make appropriate application seeking such exclusion and exemption, by producing documents substantiating their contentions. Bangalore Development Authority [‘BDA’ for short] were directed to consider such request, keeping in mind the status of the land as on the date of preliminary notification.
8. The land owners in these proceedings, made such a representation. The BDA, initially, rejected the representation. The land owners have made yet another representation pointing out that such rejection order was passed without affording an opportunity to the land owners and without holding a spot inspection.
9. There has been a second order by the Special Land Acquisition Officer recommending to drop the lands in question from acquisition proceedings.
10. The land owners herein approached this Court seeking a direction to consider their request to exclude their lands from acquisition. This Court, by order dated February 19, 2014, in Writ Petitions No.5343-5345 and 5575 of 2014, directed the BDA and the Government to expedite the consideration of withdrawal of the lands in question from acquisition.
11. Initially, when the acquisitions were made, the land owners were permitted to obtain sites from the BDA in lieu of the lands acquired. The land owners herein opted to obtain sites in lieu of compensation. Accordingly, sites were allotted to them by the BDA.
12. In the meanwhile, subsequent to the recommendation by the Land Acquisition Officer to drop the lands from acquisition, the sites allotted to the land owners in these proceedings were cancelled by execution of cancellation deeds dated March 6, 2014.
13. Thereafter, the State Government, have issued a notification dated June 18, 2014, under Sub-Section (1) of Section 19 of the BDA Act, 1976, declaring that the lands mentioned therein, which included the lands belonging to the land owners in these proceedings, were needed for public purpose.
14. The resultant position which emerged is, the land owners in these proceedings stood deprived, of both their own lands as well as the compensation in the form of sites allotted to them by the BDA.
15. Therefore, in our view, as the Special Land Acquisition Officer came to the conclusion that the lands in question were to be excluded from the acquisition, the respondents must exclude the lands in question from acquisition, keeping in mind that the land owners would lose their lands and, also, not get title to those sites allotted in lieu of compensation. Therefore, in our view, the impugned notification(Annexure-N) is unsustainable in law and liable to be quashed.
16. In the result, we allow the writ petitions No.32066 of 2014 and 33584-33586 of 2014 and quash the notification dated June 18, 2014, being Annexure-N to the writ petitions, insofar as the petition schedule lands are concerned.
17. We dispose of the writ petitions No.31933-935 of 2014 with a direction to the BDA to allot alternative sites to the petitioners-allottees, preferably, in the same area.
18. In view of the disposal of the writ petitions, all the pending interlocutory applications do not survive for consideration and they are, therefore, disposed of accordingly.
19. We make no order as to costs.
Sd/- CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/- JUDGE
cp*/yn.