Marutesh S/O Hulagappa Baraker Vs Deputy Commissioner

The petitioner contends that he is the absolute owner of the land bearing Sy.No.72// and 71//1 situated at Basapura Village, Koppal Taluk and it is contended that he has developed the land into Residential Layout. He made an application for approval of the said layout to the Koppal Urban Development Authority, Koppal for approval of the final plan. Accordingly, the Authority has approved the final plan on 05.07.2023. Thereafter, necessary infrastructure was done. The petitioner came to know that the Railway Authorities have made use of a portion of a land in Sy.No.72//* for the construction of underpass. The petitioner’s grievance is that the

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6604 WP No. 100526 of 2024

¶30

Railway Authorities without acquiring the land has utilized a portion of his land in Sy.No.72// for the construction of the underpass and has not paid the compensation. Under these circumstances, the petitioner is seeking a prayer to initiate the acquisition proceedings and pay the compensation in accordance with the existing law including all statutory benefits to him.

¶31

Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the writ papers with care.

¶32

This Court vide order dated:21.02.2024 appointed

¶33

the ADLR as a Court Commissioner to carried out the survey of the lands and to submit the report. Accordingly, the ADLR submitted the report. Counsel for the respective parties jointly submits that they are in receipt of the Commissioner’s report and are aware of the contents of the report. The oral submission made by counsel for the respective parties is placed on record. The Commissioner’s report is submitted to the Court

¶34

and is part of the Writ papers. I have perused the same minutely. The Commissioner has reported that while doing the

¶35

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6604 WP No. 100526 of 2024

¶36

work of RuB, the Railways has encroached a portion of the land in Sy.No.72// that belongs to the petitioner. The reported depicts that the Railway Authorities have utilized a portion of

¶37

the land in Sy.No.72// that belongs to the petitioner. Under these circumstances, this Court deems it proper to direct the respondents to initiate appropriate action for the acquisition of the utilized land and pay the compensation to the petitioner in accordance with the existing law including all statutory benefits at the earliest. Needless to say, the initiation and the conclusion of the action must be done strictly in accordance with the law.

¶38

5. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is allowed.

¶39

Sd/(JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE

¶40

MRP,RH LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 46

Marutesh S/O Hulagappa Baraker v. Deputy Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Marutesh S/O Hulagappa Baraker v. Deputy Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jeet Cargo Movers Vs M/S Vastala Metal Sections Unit II

M/S. Shodha Motors Private Limited Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Manjula Vs the State of Karnataka

Mangala D/O Kallappa Indi Vs the State of Karnataka

Dr. Rajesh S/O Ramagouda Nerli Vs the Technical Assistant to

Competent Officer and Chief Officer Vs Sri.Vinayak Raghuveer Baleri