This writ petition challenging Section 4(1) and Section 6(1) notifications of land acquisition was dismissed due to inordinate delay in filing the petition from 2016 without justification.
Petition dismissed on grounds of delay and laches.
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 19TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
WRIT PETITION No. 41800 OF 2016 (LA-UDA)
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by VINUTHA B S Location: High Court of Karnataka
PETITIONER Nos.2 TO 5 ARE REP. BY THEIR G.P.A HOLDER, MR. ABDUL WAJID, (PETITIONER NO.1)
…PETITIONERS
(BY SMT. LEELA P. DEVADIGA, ADVOCATE (absent))
AND:
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI YOGESH D. NAIK, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE ENTIRE ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY ISSUANCE OF SECTION 4(1) NOTIFICATION VIDE No. RD 132 AQT 67, DATED 18.12.1967 AND THE FINAL NOTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 6(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 HAS LAPSED BY OPERATION OF LAW and QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTIFICATION DATED 18.12.1967 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 4(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 AT ANNEXURE-B AS ILLEGAL AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION DULY HOLDING THAT THE ACQUISITION IN QUESTION HAS LAPSED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
In the instant writ petition, the Preliminary
Notification dated 18.12.1967 and the Final Notification dated 15.05.1972 regarding acquisition of certain lands have been challenged.
that possession of lands has been taken immediately after the notification and award has also been passed.
NC: 2024:KHC:2604 WP No. 41800 of 2016
Sd/JUDGE
MV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 64
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to allow the writ petition challenging the land acquisition notifications.
Whether the permissible period for the writ petition was extended despite a delay of 6 years.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
MR. ABDUL WAJID
MR. MOHAMMED ABBAS
MR. ABDUL HAFIZ
MR. SHAIK ABDUL RUB
MRS. REHMATHUNNISSA
THE STATE OF KARNATKA
M.I. ARUN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
