Disposed

Smt B Veena v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC12 Jul 2022WP/13462/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On preliminary hearing, the Bench admitted the Authority acquired lands without due process. Directing the Authority to determine compensation under the 2013 Act and deposit it before the Court within eight weeks, the petitions were disposed off with a direction to report compliance on a future date.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Mysore Urban Development Authority to determine compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 2013 and deposit it before the Court within eight weeks.

Smt B Veena Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 12^th DAY OF JULY, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.13462 OF 2020 [KLR-RR/SUR]

¶7

C/w.

¶8

WRIT PETITION No.13469 OF 2020 [KLR-RES]

¶9

IN WP No.13462/2020:

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

1 . SMT B VEENA W/O SOMASHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, DARASAGUPPE,

¶12

K.SHETTIHALLI HOBLI, SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 434

¶13

...PETITIONER

¶14

(By Sri. N KUMAR ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

¶17

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

¶18

¶19

MYSURU DISTRICT, MYSURU - 570 001.

¶20

3 . THE TAHSILDAR MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU - 570 001.

¶21

4 . THE MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY J.L.B.ROAD, MYSORE - 570 001 REPTD. BY ITS COMMISSIONER

¶22

5 . THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY J.L.B.ROAD MYSORE - 570 001.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI.R.SRINIVASA GOWDA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI.T.P.VIVEKANANDA ADV. FOR R4 & R5)

¶25

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENT NO.3 TAHSILDAR, MYSURU TALUK TO MAKE KATHA IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER AFTER DEMARCATING THE BOUNDARIES IN RESPECT OF LAND TO AN EXTENT OF 22 GUNTAS IN SY. NO.159/2 SITUATED AT DEVANOOR VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK BY CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION DATED 02.06.2012 VIDE ANNEXURE-S & ETC.

¶26

¶27

IN WP No.13469/2020:

¶28

BETWEEN:

¶29

1 . SMT. BHAGYA W/O. LATE SATHISHKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,

¶30

2 . SMT. PAVITHRA. S D/O. LATE SATHISHKUMAR, W/O. SATHISH, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,

¶31

3 . ROOPESH S/O. LATE SATHISH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,

¶32

ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.4403, 8TH CROSS, ST. MARYS ROAD, N.R. MOHALLA, MYSORE-570 007.

¶33

...PETITIONERS

¶34

(By Sri. N KUMAR ADVOCATE)

¶35

AND:

¶36

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

¶37

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MYSURU DISTRICT, MYSURU-570 001.

¶38

3 . THE TAHSILDAR MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU-570 001.

¶39

¶40

4 . THE MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

¶41

J.L.B. ROAD, MYSURU-570 001, REPTD. BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

¶42

5 . THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, J.L.B. ROAD, MYSURU-570 001.

¶43

…RESPONDENTS

¶44

(By Sri.R.SRINIVASA GOWDA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI.T.P.VIVEKANANDA ADV. FOR R4 & R5)

¶45

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENT NO.3 TAHSILDAR, MYSURU TALUK TO MAKE KATHA IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONERS AFTER DEMARCATING THE BOUNDARIES IN RESPECT OF LAND TO AN EXTENT OF 1 ACRE 38½ GUNTAS IN SY.NO.196 SITUATED AT DEVANOOR VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK BY CONSIDERING THE APPLICATIONS DATED 27.01.2012 AND 03.02.2012 VIDE ANNEXURES “S” AND “T” & ETC.

¶46

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

¶47

¶48

ORDER

¶49

The prayer in these writ petitions is that a mandamus to direct respondent No.3 to effect Khata in the name of the petitioners after demarcating the boundaries.

¶50

An alternative prayer is also made to direct respondent No.4 to give alternative lands of equivalent value in lieu of the lands which have been acquired without following the due process of law.

¶51

The respondent-Mysore Urban Development Authority in its objections has admitted that it has indeed acquired the lands without following the due process of law. It is also stated in the objections that

¶52

the Mysore Urban Development Authority may be permitted to determine the compensation amount under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and pay the same to the petitioners, subject to the petitioners complying with the necessary formalities.

¶53

¶54

In view of the fact that the Mysore Urban Development Authority has come forward with an undertaking that they would pay the compensation amount in terms of the 2013 Act to the petitioners in respect of their lands which have been appropriated without being acquired in accordance with law, I deem it necessary to direct the Mysore Urban Development Authority to determine the compensation amount payable for the lands acquired and deposit the said amount before this Court within a period of eight weeks from today.

¶55

With these observations, the writ petitions are disposed off .

¶56

Though these petitions are disposed off, the same shall be re-listed on 20.09.2022 to enable the Mysore Urban Development Authority to report compliance of the direction issued herein above.

¶57

Sd/JUDGE

¶58

¶59

ct: NR

Smt B Veena v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt B Veena v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Panduranga Swamy Temple Vs the Joint Director of

Sheena Poojary Vs Land Tribunal Kundapur

Sri Papanna @ Muniyappa Vs Deputy Commissioner

Smt. Anusuyamma S Vs the Deputy Commissioner and District Magistrate

Vittala Shetty Vs the Deputy Commissiner

Sri. Appajigowda Vs Assistant Comissioner