Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
R.V. Raveendran and N.K. Patil, JJ.
Shimoga Urban Development Authority and another —Appellant
Vs.
State of Karnataka and others —Respondent
Writ Appeal Nos. 1438, 2289 to 2318 and 3742 of 1997
Decided on : 27-11-2001
Jurisdiction - Urban Development - Karnataka Improvement Boards Act, 1976, Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act, 1987 - Section 15(1), Section 19(1)
Fact of the Case:
The Shimoga Urban Development Authority and its Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed against the quashing of acquisition notifications for certain lands. The landowners contended that the Improvement Board did not have jurisdiction to draw a scheme for their lands. The Single Judge allowed the writ petitions, holding that the Improvement Board had no jurisdiction over the lands in question.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Shimoga Improvement Board did not have jurisdiction to issue the acquisition notifications for the lands in question, as the lands were not part of the urban area falling within its jurisdiction at the time of the notifications. The court also held that the inordinate delay between the preliminary and final notifications rendered the final declaration invalid.
Issues: The main issue was whether the Improvement Board had jurisdiction to issue the acquisition notifications for the lands in question. Another issue was the validity of the final declaration due to the inordinate delay between the preliminary and final notifications.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Improvement Board could only draw up a development scheme and issue notifications for lands falling within its jurisdiction. It found that the lands in question were not part of the urban area falling within the Board's jurisdiction at the time of the notifications, rendering the notifications void. The court also relied on the principle that inordinate delay in issuing final notifications can render them invalid.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeals, holding that the Improvement Board had no jurisdiction to issue the acquisition notifications and that the final declaration was invalid due to the inordinate delay. The authority was given the option to initiate fresh acquisition proceedings if desired.
R.V. Raveendran, J.—The Shimoga Urban Development Authority and its Special Land Acquisition Officer are the appellants in these appeals. Writ Appeal Nos. 1438, 2289-2318 of 1997 arise from the order dated 13.12.1996 in Writ Petition Nos. 34729 of 1995 and 30337-30366 of 1992. Writ Appeal No. 3742 of 1997 arises from the order dated 5.6.1997 in Writ Petition No. 21952 of 1992.
2. The Respondents 4 to 33 were the Petitioners in Writ Petition Nos. 30337-66 of 1992 and were the owners of portions of the following lands: Survey No. 127 (12 Acres, 15 Guntas), Sy. No. 128 (1 Acre 11 Guntas), Sy. No. 131/1 (14 acres 8 Guntas), Sy. No. 131/2 (1 Acre 30 Guntas), Sy. No. 132 (11 Acres 14 Guntas), Sy. No. 133 (11 Acres 18 Guntas), Sy. No. 134 (1 Acre 32 Guntas) Sy. No. 135/1a, 135/1b, 135/2a and 135/2b (together 5 Acres 30 guntas), Sy. No. 136/1, 136/2 and 136/3 (4 Acres 21 guntas), Sy. No. 137 (1 Acre 22 guntas), Sy. No. 138 (1 Acres 02 Guntas), Sy. No. 139/1 (1 Acre 36 Guntas), Sy. No. 139/2 (1 Acre 35 Guntas), Sy. No. 140/1 to 140/6 (together 8 Acres 15 Guntas), Sy. No. 141 (4 Acres 06 Guntas) Sy. No. 142/1 (4 Acres 33 Guntas and 1 Acre 12 Guntas), Sy. No. 143 (2 Acres 11 Guntas) Sy. No. 144 (3 Acres 03 Guntas) Sy. No. 145 (7 Acres 04 Guntas) and Sy. No. 146 (3 Acres 20 Guntas), all situated at Navile Village, Kasaba Hobli, Shimoga Taluk and District.
2.1) The Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in Writ Appeal Nos. 1438 and 2289-2318 of 1997 were the Petitioners in Writ Petition No. 34729 of 1995 and they claim to be the owners of Survey Nos. 141 measuring 4 Acres 06 Guntas (Item No. 14 in the Final Notification) of the said village.
2.2) The Respondent in Writ Appeal No. 3742 of 1997 was the Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 21952 of 1992 and he claims to be the owner of survey No. 142/2 measuring 1 acre 30 guntas of the said village (wrongly shown as Sy. No. 142/1 measuring 1 acre 12 guntas under item No. 14 of the Final Notification).
3. In regard to the said lands and several other lands, a Preliminary Notification dated 22.1.1985 (Gazetted on 7.11.1985) was issued under Section 15(1) of the Karnataka Improvement Boards Act, 1976 stating that the Shimoga Improvement Board had prepared a Development Scheme and for that purpose it had proposed to acquire the lands specified in the said notification.
4. Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act, 1987 ('KUDA Act' for short) was enacted by the State Government (Published in the gazette dated 19.11.1987). The said Act came into force in regard to Shimoga Urban Area on 1.5.1988 in pursuance of a notification dated 15.4.1988 issued by the State Government under Section 3(1) of the said Act. Thereafter, the Urban Development Authority was constituted for Shimoga Urban Area by issue of a notification under Section 3(1) of the said Act. Section 78(1) of the said Act provides that on the issue of a notification under Section 3(1) of the Act constituting an Urban Development Authority for any urban area, the Karnataka Improvement Boards Act, 1976, shall cease to be applicable in such urban area.
5. After publication of the Development scheme under Section 15(1) of the Karnataka Improvement Boards Act, 1976, and after considering the representation received in that behalf, the Shimoga Urban Development Authority, the successor of the Shimoga Improvement Board submitted the scheme to the State Government for sanction. It is stated that the State Government after considering the proposal submitted to it granted sanction to the scheme under Section 18(3) of the KUDA Act on 15.3.1989. Thereafter, a large extent of about 130 acres were deleted from the Preliminary notification under a notification dated 18.11.1989 (gazetted on 7.12.1989). Ultimately, a Final declaration under Section 19(1) of the KUDA Act was issued as per notification dated 2.6.1992 (gazetted on 13.8.1992) in regard to an extent of about 112 acres including the lands which are the subject matter of these appeals.
6. Feeling aggrieved, the lan
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
