"15. It is the admitted case of the appellants that for the land in question, which was set apart for the public purpose in the approved layout, the writ petitioners have to execute a gift deed in favour of the local body. Since the writ petitioners are the owners of the entire land even after the approval, they are entitled for compensation. The owners of the lands except the lands set apart for public purpose have sold the plots/lands to individual owners. Hence, even after the approval of the layout, the local body has got some right over the lands set apart for public purpose. So the lands set apart for public purpose in the approved layout can be used by the public and the plot owners and other local body etc., Because of that, we cannot presume that the lands were automatically transfered to the local body or vest with the local body and that is why, the one of the condition laid down in the approved layout is that they are insisting the writ petitioners to execute a gift deed in favour of the local body. In this case, admittedly, even though the layout was approved, there was no gift deed executed in favour of the local body till the acquisition proceedings is over. Hence, the title to the lands in question is not at all transfered to the local body and the local body cannot be the legal owner of the lands in question."
