The High Court of Karnataka disposed of a writ petition challenging endorsements rejecting a request to refer a land acquisition matter to a Civil Court. The Court held the petitioners were estopped from seeking such reference after accepting enhanced compensation.
Writ petition rejected; costs 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.
WP No. 1509 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO. 1509 OF 2023 (LA-RES)
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by CHETAN B C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED
WP No. 1509 of 2023
ALL ARE R/AT SOMEDEVARAPALYA VILLAGE, HUTRIDURGA HOBI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT 572 126.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. YOGESH V KOTEMATH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.VIRUPAKSHAIAH P H.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.R SRINIVASA GOWDA, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDROSMENTS DTD 12.10.2022 VIDE NO.SLAOSR/HE/24/2003-04 ANNX-D1 TO D7 ISSUED BY THE R-3 AUTHORITY HOLDING THE SAME ARE ILLEGAL AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
WP No. 1509 of 2023
ORDER
Petitioners are knocking at the doors of Writ Court for assailing the Endorsements all dated 12.10.2022, copies whereof avail at Annexures-D1 to D7 issued by the Special Land Acquisition Officer whereby request of the Petitioners to refer the matter to the Civil Court under Section 28(A)(3) of the erstwhile Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has been rejected. One such Endorsement reads as under:
“ »A§gÀºÀ
PÀÄtÂUÀ¯ï vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ, ºÀÄwæzÀÄUÀð ºÉÆç½, ¸ÉÆêÉÄÃzÉêÀgÀ¥Á¼Àå UÁæªÀÄzÀ ªÁ¹AiÀiÁzÀ ²æÃ. aPÀÌtÚ ©£ï ¯ÉÃ. ¨ÉÆÃgÀAiÀÄå EªÀjUÉ w½AiÀÄ ¥Àr¸ÀĪÀÅzÉãÉAzÀgÉ, ¤ÃªÀÅ ¢£ÁAPÀ:16.02.2022 gÀAzÀÄ vÀĪÀÄPÀÆgÀÄ f¯Áè¢üPÁjAiÀĪÀjUÉ ¸À°è¹gÀĪÀ ¨sÀƸÁé¢üãÀ PÁ¬ÄzÉ 1894gÀ PÀ®A 28(J) gÀr ¸À°è¹gÀĪÀ CfðAiÀÄ£ÀÄß vÀĪÀÄPÀÆgÀÄ f¯Áè¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÀÄ vÀªÀÄä ªÉÄêÉÆ ¸ÀASÉå:J¯ïJPÀÆå¹Cgï 625-21-22 ¢£ÁAPÀ:19.02.2022 gÀAzÀÄ F PÀbÉÃjUÉ PÀ¼ÀÄ»¹ CfðzÁgÀgÀÄ ¨sÀƸÁé¢üãÀ PÁAiÉÄÝ PÀ®A 28(J) gÀr ¸À°è¹gÀĪÀ CfðAiÀÄ §UÉÎ ¥Àj²Ã°¹ ¤AiÀĪÀiÁ£ÀĸÁgÀ CUÀvÀå PÀæªÀÄ PÉÊUÉÆAqÀÄ PÀæªÀÄzÀ §UÉÎ CfðzÁgÀjUÉ »A§gÀºÀ ¤ÃqÀ®Ä ¸ÀÆa¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ.
DzÀgÀAvÉ ¥Àj²Ã°¸À¯ÁV CfðzÁgÀgÀÄ F »AzÉ ¸À°è¹gÀĪÀ PÀ®A 28(J) CfðAiÀÄ §UÉÎ «ZÁgÀuÉ £Àqɹ FUÁUÀ¯Éà CAw ªÀÄ DzÉñÀ ªÀiÁr ¥ÀjºÁgÀ ªÀÄgÀÄ ¤zsÀðgÀuÉ ªÀiÁr f¯Áè¢üPÁjUÀ¼À C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£É ¥ÀqÉzÀÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ:19.03.2022 gÀAzÀÄ ZÉPï. ¸ÀASÉå:684851 gÀÆ.23,50,955/- ªÉÆvÀÛªÀ£ÀÄß FUÁUÀ¯Éà vÀªÀÄUÉ
WP No. 1509 of 2023
¥ÁªÀw ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ ¤ÃªÀÅ ¥ÀÄ£À: ¸À°è¹gÀĪÀ CfðAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¥ÀjUÀt¸À®Ä CªÀPÁ±À E®èzÉ EgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ «¯Éà EnÖzÉ.
«±ÉõÀ ¨sÀƸÁé¢üãÁ¢üPÁj, ºÉêÀiÁªÀw £Á¯ÁªÀ®AiÀÄ, vÀĪÀÄPÀÆgÀÄ.”
argues that Section 28A of the 1894 Act provides a very special right i.e., the advantage of enhanced compensation granted to land owners comprised in the very same Notification though no such reference has been specifically
sought for in the land acquisition concerned, therefore the provisions of Subsection (3) of Section 28 come to the aid of the Petitioners inasmuch as, the matter is to be referred to the Civil Court. This having not been done, learned counsel submits, indulgence of the Writ Court is imminently warranted.
WP No. 1509 of 2023
illogically arise. He also submits that the Petitioners having accepted the enhanced compensation are estopped from turning around and now saying anything to the contra, in light of decision of the Apex Court in V CHANDRASEKARAN vs ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, (2012) 12 SCC 1334 .
In view of the above, the Writ Petition being devoid of merits is liable to be rejected and accordingly it is, costs having been made easy.
Sd/JUDGE
BSV
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20
1 issue framed by the court
Whether landowners who accepted enhanced compensation under Section 28(A) can seek reference to a Civil Court under Section 28(A)(3) claiming illegality.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
V CHANDRASEKARAN vs ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERRelied on¶49
V CHANDRASEKARAN vs ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, (2012) 12 SCC 1334 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
LAKSHMAMMA
CHIKKANNA
JAYAMMA
CHIKKANNA
RAVI KUMAR
RAMANNA
KRISHNA S DIXIT
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
