This writ petition challenged land acquisition proceedings under the KIADB Act on grounds of lapse under the 2013 Land Acquisition Act. The court referred to Apex Court decisions and dismissed the petition, declining to indulge on the submission that the 1966 Act differs regarding vesting of land.
Writ Petition is dismissed, costs having been made easy.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO. 15041 OF 2021 (LA-KIADB)
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by CHETAN B C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
…PETITIONERS
(BY MISS. ARCHANA NAIR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. AJITH A SHETTY., ADVOCATE)
AND:
WP No. 15041 of 2021
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.A SRINIVASA GOWDA, AGA FOR R1; SRI.H L PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3; SRI.P D VISHWANATH.,ADVOCATE FOR R4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE SCHEME OF ACQUISITION, AS NOTIFIED VIDE FINAL NOTIFICATION DTD 27.05.1997 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 28(4) OF THE KIADB ACT, VIDE ANNX-B, AS HAVING LAPSED IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS HOLDING IN SURVEY NUMBER 126/2P8, SURVEY NUMBERS 126/2P6 AND SURVEY NO.126/2P7 MEASURING EXTENTS OF 48 CENTS, 30 CENTS AND 40 CENTS RESPECTIVELY, OF TOKUR VILLAGE, MANGALORE TALUK, IN TERMS OF SECTION 24(2) OF THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013 OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Petitioners are knocking at the doors of Writ Court
seeking to lay a challenge to the acquisition of their land
WP No. 15041 of 2021
pursuant to the proceedings taken up under Section 28 of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 on the ground that the proceedings have lapsed in the light of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Rehabilitation Act, 2013.
Counsel for the KIADB, oppose the petition contending that in view of the decision of the Apex Court in LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER VS. ANASUYA BAI (2017) 3 SCC 313, the benefit of lapse as envisaged u/s 24(2) does not avail to acquisitions done under statutes other than Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
acquisition under the provisions of 1966 Act is a bit in variance with that of the erstwhile 1894 Act in the sense in case of the former, land immediately vests in the State on issuance of the Final Notification u/s 28(4) of the 1966
WP No. 15041 of 2021
Act, notwithstanding the award being passed or compensation being paid vide Division Bench judgment in W.P.No.17600/2004 between NANDI INFRASTRUCTURE CORRIDOR ENTERPRISE LIMITED vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA , disposed off on 15.06.2011.
and having perused the Petition Papers, this Court broadly being in agreement with the submission made on behalf of the respondents, declines indulgence in the matter.
In the above circumstances, Writ Petition is
dismissed, costs having been made easy.
Sd/JUDGE
cbc
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the benefit of lapse under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 applies to acquisitions done under th
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Land Acquisition Officer vs. Anasuya BaiReferred¶31
LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER VS. ANASUYA BAI (2017) 3 SCC 313 · Who else cites this
Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprise Limited vs. State of KarnatakaReferred¶36
W.P.No.17600/2004 between NANDI INFRASTRUCTURE CORRIDOR ENTERPRISE LIMITED vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Sandeep Shenoy
Suresh N Pai
Karthik Pai
State of Karnataka
The Special Land Acquisition Officer KIADB
Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board
Krishna S Dixit
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
