Sri. Lakshman Vs State of Karnataka

Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA Location: HIGHCOURT OF REVENUE DEPARTMENT, KARNATAKA M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560001. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

¶17

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER PHODIUM BLOCK, II FLOOR, V.V. TOWERS, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001.

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:42774 WP No. 21372 of 2024

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, BENGALURU-560009.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI HARISHA A.S., AGA)

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE 3^RD RESPONDENT AUTHORITY AS PER PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION BEARING NO.LAQ(1) CR.561/83-84 DATED 28.01.1985 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND FINAL NOTIFICATION BEARING NO.RD 126 AQB 83 DATED 24.01.1986 VIDE ANNEXURE-B IN RESPECT OF LAND BEARING SY. NO.18/7B MEASURING TO AN EXTENT 1 ACRE 06 GUNTAS INCLUDING 3 GUNTAS KHARAB SITUATED AT YALLUKUNTE VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK OWNED BY THE PETITIONER HAS LAPSED AND ETC.

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

Petitioners have approached this Court seeking the

¶29

following reliefs:

¶30

“(a) Declare that the acquisition proceedings initiated by the 3^rd respondent authority as per Preliminary Notification bearing No.LAQ (1) CR.561/83-84 dated 28.01.1985 vide Annexure-A and Final Notification bearing No.RD 126 AQB 83 dated issuing authority Respondent No.1 24.01.1986 vide Annexure-B in respect of land bearing Sy. No.18/7B measuring to an extent 1 acre

¶31

3 -

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC:42774 WP No. 21372 of 2024

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

06 guntas including 13 guntas kharab situated at Yallukunte Village, Begur Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk owned by the petitioners has lapsed;

¶35

(b) Issue Writ in the nature of Mandamus or Order or Direction in the similar nature directing the 1^st respondent authority to consider the representation dated 16.04.2024 vide Annexure-Q filed by the petitioners for deletion / de-notification of the land bearing Sy. No.18/7B measuring to an extent of 01 acre 06 guntas including 13 guntas of kharab situated at Yellukunte Village, Begur Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk and pass appropriate orders expeditiously;

¶36

(c) Grant any such other relief or relief’s as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶37

Prayer No.(a) seeks to declare that the acquisition proceedings initiated under the preliminary notification dated 28.01.1985, followed by the final notification dated 24.01.1986 in respect of land bearing Survey No.18/7B, measuring to an extent of 01 acre 06 guntas including 13 guntas karab at Yallukunte Village,

¶38

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:42774 WP No. 21372 of 2024

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

Begur Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, owned by the petitioners has lapsed.

¶41

One Muniyappa, the father of the petitioners filed WP No.30609/2004 before this Court challenging the acquisition proceedings and seeking a declaration that the notifications had lapsed, and further relief was sought for direction to the State Government to take immediate steps to de-notify the land in question. The said writ petition came to be dismissed. During its pendency, the said Muniyappa passed away, and the present petitioners were brought on record as his legal heirs. Aggrieved by the dismissal, the petitioners preferred Writ Appeal No.3638/2009, and the Division Bench, by order dated 04.11.2010, directed the State Government to take a decision on de-notification within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the order.

¶42

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, pursuant to the direction issued in the writ appeal, respondent No.1 considered their request for de-notification, and after the proceedings dated 28.04.2000, 25.08.2001 and

¶43

5 -

¶44

NC: 2025:KHC:42774 WP No. 21372 of 2024

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

11.02.2002, ordered deletion of the land from acquisition by issuing notification under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (‘LA Act’ for short) on 11.02.2002 (Annexure-G). The grievance of the petitioners is that despite, such recommendation, the petitioners’ representation for formal de-notification has not been acted upon. It is further submitted that a similar notification under Section 48 (1) was issued on 01.09.2010 in respect of Sy. No.20/10A measuring to an extent of 01 acre 22 guntas, hence, the petitioners, being similarly placed, are entitled to similar consideration.

¶47

Learned AGA for the respondent-State submits

¶48

that the representation dated 16.04.2024 filed by the petitioners shall be considered in accordance with law.

¶49

Having heard both sides, this Court is of the

¶50

opinion that the grievance of the petitioners would stand redressed, if an appropriate direction is issued to respondent No.1-authority to consider their representation and pass

¶51

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:42774 WP No. 21372 of 2024

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

appropriate orders within a stipulated time. Accordingly this Court pass the following:

¶54

ORDER

¶55

i. In view of the earlier proceedings and the order passed in writ appeal, the relief sought in prayer No.(a) does not survive for consideration.

¶56

iii. Respondent No.1-authority is directed to consider the petitioners’ representation dated 16.04.2024 filed for denotification / deletion of land bearing Survey No.18/7B to an extent of 01 acre 06 guntas including 13 guntas of karab land keeping in view the earlier notification dated 11.02.2002 (Annexure G) and the order dated 01.09.2010 passed under Section 48 (1) of the LA Act in respect of the land bearing Survey No.20/10A to an extent of 01 acre 22 guntas and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within an outer limit of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

¶57

Sd/-

¶58

______________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶59

MBM

¶60

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42

Sri. Lakshman v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Lakshman v. State of Karnataka

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

Akshaya Villa Owners Association Vs Bangalore Development Authority

Sri Janardhan Swamy Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri S C Sharma Vs the Additional Chief Secretary

Sri M Suresh Vs the Commissioner

Sri M D Charanraj Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri M R Ravi Vs the State of Karnataka