Jagadish S/O Shekappa Ekkegundi Vs Union of India

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BUILDING NO.C.A.(1-B) GROUND FLOOR, KARUR INDUSTRIAL AREA, P.B. ROAD, DAVANAGERI – 577 006.

¶32

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HAVERI – 581 110.

¶33

THE TAHASHILDAR, RATTIHALLI, HAVERI – 581 116.

¶34

…RESPONDENTS

¶35

(BY SRI. MRUTYUNJAY S. HALLIKERI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2; SMT. SHARMILA M. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R3 & R4; SRI. S.V. MAGADUM, AGA FOR R5 & R6)

¶36

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE

¶37

I. SEEKING A WRIT OF CERTIORARI ORDER DATED 06/11/2023 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.5 BEARING DC.HAV-15022(11/12/2023-HAV-LAQ VIDE ANNEXURE-D.

¶38

II. ISSUE A WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING TO RESPONDENTS RESURVEY AND

¶39

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

CHANGE THE PROPOSED RAILWAY LINE AT RATTIHLLI, YALIWAL(SIDDAPUR) AND DODDAGUBBI VILLAGE.

¶42

III. ISSUE A WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 6 NOT TO DISPOSSESS THE PETITIONERS OF THE PETITION FROM THEIR LAND/PLOT/HOUSE.

¶43

IV. GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS AS DEEMED FIT BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶44

IN WRIT PETITION NO. 100224 OF 2024

¶45

BETWEEN:

¶46

NAGANAGOUDA

¶47

S/O. SHIVANAGOUDA PATIL, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. RATTIHALLI VILLAGE,

¶48

TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 116.

¶49

PRABHU S/O. RAVANAPPA MUDIVEERANNAVAR, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. RATTIHALLI VILLAGE, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 116.

¶50

BASANAGOUDA S/O.KAREGOUDA GHANTEPPAGOUDAR, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. RATTIHALLI VILLAGE, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 116.

¶51

DEVARAJ S/O. HALAPPA SURYAVAMSHI, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. RATTIHALLI VILLAGE, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 116.

¶52

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

UJANEPPA S/O. NAGAPPA DYAVAKKALAVAR, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. RATTIHALLI VILLAGE,

¶55

TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 116.

¶56

NAGAPPA S/O. GURANAGOUDA HOSALLI, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. CHIKKA MATTUR VILLAGE,

¶57

HIREKERUR TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT – 581 109.

¶58

SMT. GIRIJAMMA W/O. BASAVARAJAPPA KAYAKAD, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. RATTIHALLI VILLAGE,

¶59

TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 116.

¶60

RUDRESH S/O. BEERAPPA HOLAJOGI, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. RATTIHALLI VILLAGE,

¶61

TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 116.

¶62

RAJU S/O. M. VEERAPPA MALAGOUDAR, AGE: 45, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. RATTIHALLI VILLAGE, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 116.

¶63

MAHADEVGOUDA S. PATIL, AGE: 59, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. RATTIHALLI VILLAGE, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 116.

¶64

…PETITIONERS

¶65

(BY SRI. M.R. HIREMATHAD & SRI. PRAKASH BADIGER, ADVOCATES)

¶66

AND:

¶67

UNION OF INDIA, R/BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF RAILWAY, NEW DELHI – 110 001.

¶68

THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,

¶69

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶70

HC-KAR

¶71

GADAG ROAD, KESHWAPUR, HUBBALLI – 580 020.

¶72

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, NO.49, 4 AND 5^TH FLOOR, EAST WING, KANIJA BHAVAN,

¶73

RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 003.

¶74

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICE, BUILDING NO. C. A(1-B), GROUND FLOOR, KARUR INDUSTRIAL AREA, P.B. ROAD, DAVANGERI – 577 006.

¶75

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HAVERI DISTRICT, HAVERI – 581 110.

¶76

THE TAHASHILDAR, RATTIHALLI, DIST: HAVERI – 581 116.

¶77

…RESPONDENTS

¶78

(BY SRI. MRUTYUNJAY S. HALIKERI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2; SMT. SHARMILA M. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R3 & R4; SRI. SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA FOR R5 & R6)

¶79

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO

¶80

I. SEEKING A WRIT OF CERTIORARI ORDER BEARING NO. DC-HAV-15022(11/12/2023-HAV-LAQ DATED 06/11/2023 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.5 VIDE ANNEXURE-D PERTAINING TO PETITIONER LAND ONLY.

¶81

II. ISSUE A WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECT TO RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 4 RESURVEY AND CHANGE THE PROPOSED RAILWAY LINE AT RATTIHLLI, YALIWAL (SIDDAPUR) AND DODDAGUBBI VILLAGE.

¶82

6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶83

HC-KAR

¶84

III. ISSUE A WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 6 NOT TO DISPOSSESS THE PETITIONERS OF THE PETITION FROM THEIR LAND/PLOT/HOUSE.

¶85

IV. GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS AS DEEMED FIR BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶86

IN WRIT PETITION NO. 102161 OF 2024

¶87

BETWEEN:

¶88

JAGADISH S/O. SHEKAPPA EKKEGUNDI, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: TADAKANHALLI VILLAGE, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 116, HAVERI – 581 110.

¶89

…PETITIONER

¶90

(BY SRI. M.R. HIREMATHAD & SRI. PRAKASH R. BADIGER, ADVOCATES)

¶91

AND:

¶92

UNION OF INDIA, R/BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF RAILWAY, NEW DELHI – 110 001.

¶93

THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY, GADAG ROAD, KESHWAPUR, HUBBALLI – 580 020, DIST: DHARWAD.

¶94

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, R/BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, NO.49, 4 AND 5^TH FLOOR, EAST WING, KANIJA BHAVAN, RACE CORSE ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 003.

¶95

7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶96

HC-KAR

¶97

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BUILDING NO.C.A(1-B), GROUND FLOOR, KARUR INDUSTRIAL AREA, P.B. ROAD, DAVANAGERI – 577 006.

¶98

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HAVERI – 581 110.

¶99

THE TAHASHILDAR, RATTIHALLI, HAVERI – 581 116.

¶100

…RESPONDENTS

¶101

(BY SRI. MRUTYUNJAY S. HALLIKERI, ADVOCATE FOR R1& R2; SMT. SHARMILA M. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R3 AND R4; SRI. SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA FOR R5 & R6)

¶102

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO

¶103

I. SEEKING A WRIT OF CERTIORARI ORDER BEARING NO. DC-HAV-15022(11/112/2023- HAV-LAQ DATED 06/11/2023 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 5 VIDE ANNEXURE-D INSOFAR PETITIONER LAND/PROPERTY BEARING NO.1/94 OF RATTIHALLI GRAM PANCHAYAT.

¶104

II. ISSUE A WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING TO RESPONDENTS NO. 2 TO 4 RESURVEY AND CHANGE THE PROPOSED RAILWAY LINE AT RATTIHLLI, YALIWAL (SIDDAPUR) AND DODDAGUBBI VILLAGE.

¶105

III. ISSUE A WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS NO. 2 TO 6 NOT TO DISPOSSESS THE PETITIONERS OF THE PETITION FROM THEIR LAND/PLOT/HOUSE.

¶106

8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶107

HC-KAR

¶108

IV. GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS AS DEEMED FIT BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶109

IN WRIT PETITION NO. 102275 OF 2024 BETWEEN:

¶110

ASHOK S/O. BHARAMAPPA BULLAPUR, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KODAMAGGI MASURU VILLAGE, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 210.

¶111

BELAKERAPPA S/O. HANUMANTAPPA GUNDAGATTI, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KODAMAGGI MASURU VILLAGE, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 210.

¶112

KRISHNAPPA S/O. LATE DEVAPPA BANKARPUR, AGED ABOUT: 67 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KODAMAGGI MASURU VILLAGE, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 210.

¶113

RAMACHANDRAPPA S/O. HANUMNTHAPPA JADAV, AGED ABOUT: 62 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KODAMAGGI MASURU VILLAGE, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 210.

¶114

NAJEER SAB S/O. MUNAF SAB SIDDAPUR, AGED ABOUT: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KODAMAGGI MASURU VILLAGE, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 210.

¶115

SAJJANSHETTAR VIRUPAPAKSHAPPA S/O. SHIVARUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT: 82 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: MASURU VILLAGE, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 210.

¶116

9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶117

HC-KAR

¶118

BEERAPPA S/O. HALAPPA GUNDAGATTI, AGED ABOUT: 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KODAMAGGI MASURU VILLAGE, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 210.

¶119

SALIHA S/O. ANWAR SAB, AGED ABOUT: 44 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KODAMAGGI MASURU VILLAGE, JANATA PLOT, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 210.

¶120

KRISHNAJI RAV DHULOJI KARATA, AGED ABOUT: 76 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KODAMAGGI MASURU VILLAGE, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 210.

¶121

TALAVAR THIRUKAPPA S/O. PAKKIRAPPA (TALAVAR), AGED ABOUT: 53 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KODAMAGGI MASURU VILLAGE, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI – 581 210.

¶122

…PETITIONERS

¶123

(BY SRI. M R HIREMATHAD & SRI. PRAKASH BADIGER, ADVOCATES)

¶124

AND:

¶125

UNION OF INDIA, R/BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF RAILWAY, NEW DELHI – 110 001.

¶126

THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY, GADAG ROAD, KESHWAPUR, HUBBALLI – 580 020, DIST: DHARWAD.

¶127

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, R/BY CEO, NO.49, 4 AND 5^TH FLOOR, EAST WING, KANIJA BHAVAN, RACE CORSE ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 003.

¶128

10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶129

HC-KAR

¶130

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, R/BY SLA OFFICER, SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BUILDING NO.C.A(1-B), GROUND FLOOR, KARUR INDUSTRIAL AREA, P.B. ROAD, DAVANAGERI – 577 006.

¶131

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HAVERI – 581 110.

¶132

THE TAHASHILDAR, RATTIHALLI, HAVERI – 581 116.

¶133

…RESPONDENTS

¶134

(BY SRI. MRUTYUNJAY S. HALLIKERI, ADVOCATE FOR R1& R2; SMT. SHARMILA M. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R3 AND R4; SRI. SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA FOR R5 & R6)

¶135

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO

¶136

A) SEEKING A WRIT OF CERTIORARI ORDER BEARING NO. DC-HAV- (11/12/2023-HAV-LAQ DATED 06/11/2023 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.5 VIDE ANNEXURE-D.

¶137

B) ISSUE A WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECT TO RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 4 RESURVEY AND CHANGE THE PROPOSED RAILWAY LINE AT RATTIHLLI, YALIWAL (SIDDAPUR) AND DODDAGUBBI VILLAGE.

¶138

C) ISSUE A WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 6 NOT TO DISPOSSESS THE PETITIONERS OF THE PETITION FROM THEIR LAND/PLOT/HOUSE.

¶139

D) GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS AS DEEMED FIT BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶140

11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶141

HC-KAR

¶142

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶143

ORAL ORDER

¶144

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)

¶145

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

¶146

learned AGA as well as the learned counsel for the respondents.

¶147

Petitioners are before this Court seeking to

¶148

quash the impugned order passed by the 5^th respondent dated 06.11.2023 and for a direction to re-survey or change the alignment of the proposed new railway line between Shivamogga-Shikaripur-Ranebennur railway line.

¶149

The Central Government Railway Department approved new railway line project between ShivamoggaShikaripur-Ranebennur at an estimated cost of ₹832.45 crores on 50:50 per share between the State Government and Central Government. The railway line proposed to start from Shivamogga-via-Shikaripur-Ranebennur. The respondents No.2 to 4 accordingly appointed the Survey Officers and other required persons for survey and

¶150

12 -

¶151

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶152

HC-KAR

¶153

mapping of route of the railway line. According to the petitioners, the railway line starts from Shivamogga to Shikaripur and to end at Ranebennuru. The same passes through Survey Nos.105/B, 106A, 106/2, 204 and 89 of the Rattihalli village of Haveri District. Said survey numbers are converted to non-agriculture lands and some petitioners have already constructed their houses. Hence, the petitioners made a representation to respondents No.5 and 6 requesting the proposed line passing through between village and between residential houses is affecting the villagers and sought for re-survey of the proposed railway project.

¶154

It is further contented by the learned counsel for the petitioners that respondents no.5 and 6 forwarded the same to respondent no.4 and recommended to change the railway line. Respondent No.4 has requested respondent no.6, which was forwarded to respondent no.4 to recommend the change of the railway line.

¶155

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶156

13 -

¶157

HC-KAR

¶158

The petitioners have also made a

¶159

representation to respondent no.2 and requested to change the modification of the proposed railway line, which was not considered by the respondents. Hence, the petitioners filed a Writ Petition No.105848/2022, whereby this Court disposed of the same, directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioners and the respondents No.1 and 2 to take suitable actions and pass appropriate orders. Thereafter, the respondent/Railway Department considered the representation and issued an endorsement dated 20.03.2023. It is the grievance of the petitioners that the respondent/Railways and the KIADB intending to change the entire station platform and may change from its original plan and the alignment which was initially prepared. Thereby affecting the individual rights of the petitioners and the property rights of the petitioners, thereby violating their rights to property including Article 300A of the Constitution of India to enjoy property of the petitioners.

¶160

14 -

¶161

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶162

HC-KAR

¶163

Learned counsel for the petitioners further

¶164

contends that he does not have any objection in original allignment, which was made by the Railway Department to continue and the acquisition process to be continued in accordance with law by following the due process of law, rather than changing the alignment plan and the construction of the platforms being shifted time and again to suit certain influential persons. Hence, the present petition by the petitioners.

¶165

Learned counsel Sri Mrutyunjay S. Hallikeri appearing for the respondent/Railway Department submits that the Railway Board had sanctioned the reconnaissance Engineering survey for connecting existing Shivamogga station to existing Ranebennur station via Shikaripura in the year 2012. Based on the survey order made, alignments were made duly indicating techno economic analysis for each alignment which are drawn and based on the techno economic analysis the present alignment has been finalized and submitted to the Railway Board in the

¶166

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶167

15 -

¶168

HC-KAR

¶169

year 2017 at the cost of ₹956.48 crores. He further submits that the alignment of the project has been finalized keeping in mind all the parameters particularly interest of the local public as the project is of public importance. However, he contends that the final location survey has been sanctioned by the Railway Board in the year 2017 and the new line has been sanctioned by the Railway Board in the year 2019 for ₹994.47 crores. Accordingly, the Government of Karnataka issued Government Order No.IDD 31 NSW 2017 dated 22.08.2019 for taking up the subject project on cost sharing basis with a cost of ₹956.10 crore and land cost of at ₹244.73 crores. This being the state of affairs, there were certain objections raised and the petitioners had approached this Court and obtained an order. Based on the order passed by this Court, the issue was reexamined, duly taken up for consideration and all aspects suggested by the petitioners were considered including shifting of alignment by 200 meters towards north of Rattihalli Town was examined and it was found that that

¶170

16 -

¶171

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶172

HC-KAR

¶173

there will be substantial increase in the cost of railway project to the tune of nearly ₹20 crore as there will be necessary connections at either ends, which necessitates sharper degree of curvature and extra road on bridge. This will invite permanent speed restrictions of 90 km/h as against the designed speed of 160 km/h for the present alignment.

¶174

It is further contended that permanent speed restriction will further get compounded due to the proximity of canal waterway due to seepage of water into the proposed formation of the alignment, thereby affecting the safety.

¶175

Learned counsel further contends that before considering these aspects Railway Department has conducted due diligence considering all the parameters the techno-economic feasibility, speed potential as well as proximity to the users with well-connected approach of the existing villages for the alignment of the railway line to the particular area. Therefore, after analyzing all these aspects

¶176

17 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶177

HC-KAR

¶178

which was decided that there was no possibility of shifting the alignment based on the techno-economic feasibility as suggested by the petitioners. The learned counsel further contends that in case of even shifting assuming for the sake of argument, one or the other persons land will be acquired for formation of the railway line and either the petitioners or the other landowners will be affected. Therefore, on the basis of techno-economic feasibility and due diligence, the railway alignment line has been finalized, which would be considered by the KIADB for acquisition and the acquisition process would be conducted in accordance to the Act, Rules and due process of law would be followed by providing suitable notice and principles of natural justice would be followed.

¶179

Learned counsel for respondents no.3 and 4 concurs with the arguments put forth by learned counsel for the Railway Department and she contends that the present petition filed by the petitioners is vexatious without there being any interest for the general public. It

¶180

18 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶181

HC-KAR

¶182

is only for the benefit of petitioners rather than the public cause. He further contends that the alignment so made by the Railway Department to the railway line is far from the school and it does not affect the school in any manner as contended by the petitioners. So also the requirement of the railway line is on the basis of no profit and no loss and it is required for the public purpose and public at large. Therefore, when the public purpose is the larger interest, the private individual interest would yield to the larger public interest in such situations where railway lines are sought to be laid for the development of the neighbouring areas, villages and public at large. On these grounds, he seeks to dismiss the petition of the petitioners.

¶183

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents. The petitioners were before this Court in the earlier round of litigation, whereby this court directed the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioners and pass suitable orders in accordance with law. On the basis of the said

¶184

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶185

19 -

¶186

HC-KAR

¶187

order passed by this court, the respondents have reconsidered whether there could be any possibility or feasibility of changing the railway line alignment from the one which was already initiated by the Railway Department after conducting the necessary economic analysis and alternative alignments. The request of the petitioners for changing the line and shifting it was reiterated that there was no possibility of shifting the alignment as suggested by the petitioners as it would cause both hardship and inconvenience to the public at large and also the financial expenses which will be huge. On these grounds, the respondents have decided to proceed further with the alignment to lay the line as was decided by the Railway Department.

¶188

It is the grievance of the petitioners that the respondents are conducting the survey interfering the petitioner's property without there being any acquisition and without following the due process of law, without providing any notice and violating the principles of natural

¶189

20 -

¶190

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶191

HC-KAR

¶192

justice. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that they would acquire the property by following due process of law and proceed further for acquisition by initiating necessary process inconsonance with Section 28 of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board Act following the process or procedure laid down under the Act by notifying concerned persons including receiving and others interested giving scope for filing objections to the petitioners and thereafter proceed further with the acquisition process in accordance with law.

¶193

In WP.102275/2024, preliminary notification

¶194

has already been issued under Section 28(1) of the KIADB Act, the further process has been stopped in view of the orders passed by this Court, thereafter counsel submit that they would follow due process of law by notifying, thereafter and proceed further in the acquisition proceedings.

¶195

21 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8668 WP No. 101870 of 2024 C/W.WP.Nos.100224, 102161 & 102275 of 2024.

¶196

HC-KAR

¶197

Therefore, under the circumstances, I do not

¶198

find any good or cogent reason to interfere in this petition to show indulgence to these petitioners on the issuance of impugned order. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶199

ORDER

¶200

(i) Petition is dismissed.

¶201

(ii) However, it is made clear that the respondents shall follow the due process of law while acquiring the properties for laying down the railway line, consider the objections, if any, of the petitioners and also provide a hearing if required to the petitioners while passing the orders, including survey and acquisition and the issuance of notification both preliminary and final.

¶202

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

¶203

KGK/CKK CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 78

Jagadish S/O Shekappa Ekkegundi v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagadish S/O Shekappa Ekkegundi v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Sushma W/O Ashtavinayak Patil Vs Smt. Malutai W/O Rajaram Patil

Vijayendra S/O. Keshavrao Vernekar Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri. Yashwant S/O Giriyappa Shetaraddi Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri Ravi a N S/O Late a Nagendrappa Vs the Managing Director

Sayed Nisar Ali S/O Syed Naseer Ali Vs Director of Municipal Administration

Ganesh S/O Narayanappa Salunke Vs Union of India