Dismissed

Sri.Ninganagouda S/O Mallanagouda Naikar @ Kadakol v. the Special Land Acquisition Officer

Karnataka HC4 Oct 2023WP/113147/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by land losers against the Reference Court's order rejecting their Section 18(3)(b) application under the Land Acquisition Act, 1984. The court held that the petition was barred by law due to an inordinate delay of 33 years.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as devoid of merits.

Sri.Ninganagouda S/O Mallanagouda Naikar @ Kadakol Vs the… — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:11675 WP No. 113147 of 2019

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.113147 OF 2019 (LA-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI NINGANAGOUDA S/O. MALLANAGOUDA NAIKAR @ KADAKOL, AGE: 71 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE & AGRICULTURE NOW NIL, R/O: MUNAVALLI VILLAGE-591117, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶10

SRI SHIVNAGOUDA S/O MALLANAGOUDA NAIKAR @ KADAKOL, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: MUNAVALLI VILLAGE-591117, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶11

MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR

¶12

Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2023.10.12 11:38:40 +0530

¶13

SMT. AKKAMMA @ MAHADEVI W/O. GOUDAPPA NAIKAR @ KADAKOL, AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: SHANTINAGAR, SAUNDATTI-591213, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶14

SMT. MALLAVVA W/O. PARAMESH VAKKUND, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: HOSAYALLAPUR, NAVALUR AGASI, DHARWAD-580001, DIST: DHARWAD.

¶15

SMT. GOURAVVA W/O. GOUDAPPA NAIKAR @ KADAKOL, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: GARAJUR VILLAGE-591102, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶16

SMT. SHOBHA W/O. IRAPPA HADIMANI, AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,

¶17

¶18

NC: 2023:KHC-D:11675 WP No. 113147 of 2019

¶19

R/O: GARAJUR VILLAGE-591102, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶20

…PETITIONERS

¶21

(BY SMT. SHANTA BELLIKATTI, ADVOCATE)

¶22

AND:

¶23

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BAGALKOTE-587101, TQ & DIST: BAGALKOTE.

¶24

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MLBC, NAVILUTEERTHA DIVISION NO.3-591213, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶25

…RESPONDENTS

¶26

(BY SRI P.N. HATTI, HCGP)

¶27

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING OF ORDER DATED 04.06.2019 IN LAC MISC. NO.105/2016 PASSED BY THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDITONAL MACT SAUNDATTI VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND MODIFY THE SAME BY ALLOWING LAC MISC. NO.105/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDITIONAL MACT SAUNDATTI FILED UNDER SECTION 18(3)(b) OF AMENDED LAND ACQUISITION ACT 1984 R/W. SECTION 151 OF CPC.

¶28

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶29

3 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:11675 WP No. 113147 of 2019

¶30

ORDER

¶31

The captioned petition is filed by the land losers assailing the order of the Reference Court passed on an application filed under Section 18(3)(b) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 (for short ‘Act, 1984’).

¶32

The petitioners herein filed an application under Section 18(3)(b) of the ‘Act, 1984’ seeking direction against respondent No.1 – Land Acquisition Officer to refer the petition filed under Section 18(1) of the ‘Act, 1984’ for adjudication. The said petition is strongly resisted by the respondents. The Reference Court on examining the materials on record has rejected 18(3)(b) application on two counts. Referring to the materials on record, the Reference Court found that the reference application under Section 18(1) of the ‘Act, 1984’ is submitted on 30.12.2014, while the award is passed in the year 1982. Therefore, the Reference Court was of the view that the reference application under Section 18(1) of the ‘Act, 1984’ filed in 2014 is barred. It is in this background, the Reference Court has declined to entertain the application filed by the petitioners under Section 18(3)(b) of the ‘Act, 1984’. The

¶33

4 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:11675 WP No. 113147 of 2019

¶34

Reference Court has rejected the application by recording a categorical finding that the reference application is filed after lapse of 33 years.

¶35

Though the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners vehemently argued and persuaded this Court, I am not inclined to entertain the grounds urged in the captioned writ petition.

¶36

It is forthcoming from the records that the award is passed in the year 1982. When the award is passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, the landlords, who are aggrieved by the compensation determined by the Land Acquisition Officer, are entitled to seek reference by filing a protest petition under Section 18(1) of the ‘Act, 1984’ within six weeks from the date of receipt of notice under Section 12 of the ‘Act, 1984’ or within six months from the date of collecting award amount, whichever period shall first expires. If the relevant date is taken as 1982 to calculate the period as indicated in 18(3)(b) of the ‘Act, 1984’, then I am of the view that the Reference Court was justified in not entertaining the petition filed by the petitioners under Section 18(3)(b) of the ‘Act, 1984’.

¶37

5 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:11675 WP No. 113147 of 2019

¶38

Neither the petitioners nor their ancestors has sought reference by filing an application under Section 18(1) of the ‘Act, 1984’. The application is not filed within the prescribed

¶39

period as indicated in 18(2)(b) of the Act, 1984. If the reference application under Section 18(1) of the ‘Act, 1984’ is hopelessly barred, the Reference Court was justified in not entertaining the application filed under Section 18(3)(b) of the ‘Act, 1984’. Therefore, the application is not maintainable in the light of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. LAXUMAN¹ . The award statement produced by the petitioners before this Court does not assist the petitioners to overcome the inordinate delay of 33 years.

¶40

Therefore, the writ petition is devoid of merits and stands dismissed.

¶41

Sd/JUDGE

¶42

NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3

¶43

1 2005(8) SCC 709

Sri.Ninganagouda S/O Mallanagouda Naikar @ Kadakol v. the Special Land Acquisition Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.Ninganagouda S/O Mallanagouda Naikar @ Kadakol v. the Special Land Acquisition Officer

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

Savitri Kom Bhairveshwar Bhat Vs Krishna Damodhar Prabhu Since Deceased by His Lrs

Shankarrao Govindrao Bhandurge Vs the Commissioner, Belgaum

Umakant Somashekhar Kshatriya Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Vasanti Siddappa Pujer, Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Shri Anand S/O Mahadevappa Kanashetti Vs Smt. Vinutha W/O Anand Kanashetti

Shankar S/O. Shivappa Belgavi Vs the Commissioner