IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
B.M. Shyam Prasad, J.
Ranganathan N. Dead By Lrs Rajalaxmamma and Others – Petitioners
Versus
The State of Karnataka and Others - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 24480 of 2021
Decided On : 06-03-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. notification of land acquisition under highways act. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. contention on compliance with section 14 requirements. (Para 5 , 6 , 19) |
| 3. judicial interpretation of 'highway' and acquisition purposes. (Para 8 , 10 , 12 , 22) |
| 4. importance of equitable compensation in land acquisition. (Para 14 , 23) |
| 5. final judgment on land compensation pursuant to acquisition. (Para 24 , 25) |
ORDER :
1. The petitioners are the owners of land in Sy.Nos.232, 233, 229/A, 235/A, 235/B, and 224/1 of Madhuvanahalli village, Palya Hobli, Kollegal Taluk, Chamarajanagar District [for easy reference, these lands are hereafter together referred to as the 'subject properties'], and the petitioners have impugned the notification dated 05.04.2021 [Annexure-H] issued under the provisions of Section 15 of the KARNATAKA STATE HIGHWAYS ACT , 1964 [for short, 'the Highways Act'] insofar as the subject properties.
2. The circumstances preceding the issuance of the impugned notification dated 05.04.2021 are that on 07.06.2017, the second respondent has issued a public notification stating that the Government has accorded its approval for purchase of lands required for the purposes of developing State Highway No. 79 [between Kollegal and Hanur] over a distance of 23.800 kms under KSHIP-3 Project Package - 1A and the lands mentioned in the schedule appended to the public notification would be necessary for such purpose. The subject properties are mentioned in this public notification.
3. Thereafter, the petitioners are issued with the notice dated 09.06.2017 informing that the necessary proceedings will be conducted on 22.06.2017 at 10am in the morning to ascertain the extents as also the owner of the lands abutting the State Highway and that there is necessary approval for compulsory acquisition of the lands for the aforesaid purpose under Section 15 of the Highways Act. Admittedly, this notice, though dated 09.06.2017, is served on the petitioners' representatives only on 22.06.2017 at 6.50 pm.
4. On 09.11.2017, a public meeting is held under the chairmanship of the Deputy Commissioner, Chamarajanagar District for fixing the price in the event there is a voluntary sale of the land required for the purposes of the project. The proceedings recorded the details of participation, and for the present purposes the following two paragraphs would be crucial inasmuch as there is reference to the measures taken to identify the lands that are required for acquisition and the participation by the power of attorney of the first to forth petitioners:
After this meeting, the impugned notification dated 05.04.2021 is issued under Section 15 of the Highways Act. In the meanwhile, on behalf of the petitioners, an application is also filed for changing the pathway of the proposed bypass as part of the development of the aforesaid State Highway between Kollegal to Hanur. The development of the road, including the construction of a substantial part of the bypass, is almost complete (1).
(1) A google image is produced, and it is referred to in the course of this order.
5. Sri Onkara K.B., learned counsel for the petitioners urges three grounds in support of the petitioners' challenge to the acquisition proceedings and these three grounds are as follows:
5.1 The acquisition under Section 15 of the Highways Act must necessarily be preceded by a survey as contemplated under Section 14 . The notice dated 09.06.2017 purportedly under Section 16 of the Highways Act is issued to the petitioners informing them that the necessary proceedings for identification and demarcation would be held on 22.06.2017 at 11.00 am. The petitioners are served with the notice on the same day [22.06.2017] but after sunset at 6.50pm. The provisions of Section 14 of the Highways Act are mandatory, and because it cannot be disputed that these mandatory provisions have not been c
AI
The court affirmed that procedural non-compliance does not invalidate acquisition proceedings unless it causes prejudice, and jurisdiction must be established for issuing notifications under the Tami....
Point of law: Land Acquisition - Where in respect of any land, a notification has been published under sub-section (1) of section 3A for its acquisition but no declaration under sub-section (1) has b....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that land acquisition proceedings can be challenged after the passing of the award and receipt of compensation in exceptional cases falling within ....
The court clarified that the declaration of land as a National Highway before acquisition and the Competent Authority's order under the 1956 Act do not require strict adherence to judicial procedures....
Authorities under the National Highways Act are not required to consider objections submitted prior to formal notification when objections are not filed within the prescribed timeframe.
Notifications must meet the statutory requirements and furnish all the details in the notification issued at the first instance. Vague notifications may not be quashed, and the court may direct the r....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.