Allowed

Sri M Gangadhar v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC27 Jan 2014WP/214/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the writ petition declaring that the land acquisition scheme concerning the petitioner's land in Yeshwanthapura has lapsed under Section 27 of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976. This decision relied on the reasoning applied in the identical case of W.P.No.46953/13 disposed of in December 2013.

What did the court decide?

Allowed the petition and declared that the Scheme insofar as the petitioner’s land is concerned has lapsed under Section 27 of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976.

Sri M Gangadhar Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

¶3

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2014

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 214 OF 2014 (LA-BDA)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. M. GANGADHAR S/O. LATE MUNIVEERAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/A. No. 182, PANTHARAPALYA MYSORE ROAD BANGALORE – 560039

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. P. SUBRAMANYAM, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT M.S.BUILDINGS BANGALORE – 560001

¶13

BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD KUMARA PARK WEST BANGALORE 560020 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER

¶14

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD KUMARA PARK WEST BANGALORE - 560020

¶15

... RESPONDENTS

¶16

¶17

(BY SRI. D. NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R1

¶18

SRI. C.R.GOPALA SWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS/SCHEME IN RESPECT OF THE LAND TO AN EXTENT OF 43,544.82 SQ.FT IN SY.NO.103 SITUATED AT NAGRABHAVI VILLAGE, YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TQ., PASSED BY THE R1 AND R2 PRL. NOTIFICATION DATED 15/7/1982 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND FINAL NOTIFICATION DATED 16/8/1985 VIDE ANNEXURE-B, ARE LAPSED UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, 1976.

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The petitioner herein is the brother of the petitioner in

¶23

W.P.No.46953/13, which was disposed of by an order of this court dated 13/12/2013, produced at Annexure-K to the writ petition. The petitioner claims that he owns the land adjacent to the very land which was the subject matter of the earlier writ petition and has filed the present writ petition on the very grounds that were urged in the earlier petition.

¶24

It is to be noticed that the earlier petition is contested

¶25

by the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA, for brevity)

¶26

¶27

and apart from filing statement of objections, additional documents were also produced. But the facts that emerged were that, the notifications in respect of the land sought to be acquired were of the year 1982 and 1985, respectively, and it was also urged that compensation in respect of the lands so acquired, was deposited in the year 2007, whereas it was inexplicably stated that, possession of the lands has been taken in the year 2004 itself, and therefore, in view of this inconsistency which was not explained, and added to the circumstance, that the land remained without any development, though it was contended on behalf of the BDA that possession of the land, not only had been taken, but the Scheme had been substantially implemented, remained questionable, when it was further noticed that there were structures on the land in question, and the documents produced in support of the case of the BDA that possession had been taken, was not in accordance with law and it is in that background that the said petition was allowed.

¶28

¶29

Applying the same reasoning, as the facts and

¶30

circumstances are identical, the present petition is allowed. It is declared that the Scheme insofar as the petitioner’s land is concerned, has lapsed in view of Section 27 of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976.

¶31

Sd/JUDGE

¶32

Rd/-

Sri M Gangadhar v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri M Gangadhar v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Ramesh Herale Vs State of Karnataka

Dell India Private Limited Vs Nil

Sonicwall Bv - India Branch Vs Nil

Acharya Institute of Graduate Studies Vs State of Karnataka

Karnataka State Reedyjana Sanghas Vs State of Karnataka

Garden City College Vs State of Karnataka