The court ruled that failure to comply with statutory requirements for addressing objections in land acquisition invalidates the process, emphasizing the necessity of natural justice in such proceedings.

ORDER :

1. In these batch of writ petitions, petitioners are seeking quashing of notification dated 19.07.2012 and the notification dated 07.08.2013 issued under Sections 4 (1) and 6(1) respectively of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894 by the respondent-State seeking acquisition of lands in Sy.Nos Nos. 65, 66, 67/2, 68/1, 69 and 71, in all measuring 19 acres 18 guntas situated Naganathapura Village, Begur Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk for the purposes of expansion of Central Jail at Parappana Agrahara, Bengaluru.

2. Common case of the Petitioners is that they are the owners of land forming part of the aforesaid survey numbers having purchased the same under different registered deeds of sale as detailed in their respective writ petitions and being in possession and enjoyment of the same. Some of the petitioners had applied and obtained the change of land usage from agricultural to non agricultural residential purposes. Some of them having entered into agreements for joint development had even obtained requisite permissions from the statutory authorities for the purpose of development and had even commenced construction of the residential apartment on the aforesaid land.

3. That earlier by Notification dated 19.02.1980 respondents had acquired certain lands forming part of very same survey numbers for providing road to new central jail. Thereafter by another notification dated 09.03.1989 respondent sought to acquire remaining extent of land in said survey numbers. That though a declaration under Section 6 (1) of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT had been issued on 24.05.1990 the respondent had denotified the land. That by a third notification dated 22.12.1998 respondent had again sought to acquire the lands which were omitted subsequently. That by an order dated 10.06.2001 respondent-State had permitted acquisition of the aforesaid lands invoking provisions of Section 17 of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT . The said order was challenged in W.P.No.10883/2012. That the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 12.04.2012 allowed the writ petition quashing the said order keeping open the option for the respondent to take action in accordance with law by issuing notification under Section 4 (1) of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT and by providing an opportunity to the petitioners of being heard in the matter if the property was really needed for any public purpose. Thus, the present notifications are issued for the fourth time indicating that the requirement of land by the respondent authorities is neither genuine nor imminent.

4. That the objection statements were filed by the petitioners. Special Land Acquisition Officer in his report dated 25/26.03.2013 had recommended for reconsideration of the matter. That there has been non-compliance of Section 5A of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894. Thus, the petitioners claiming to be the owners of their respective portions for land as above, are before this Court seeking quash of the notifications as referred to hereinabove.

5. Objection statements have been filed by the Respondents in W.P. Nos.57465-57466/2013 contending inter-alia:

(a) That the prison was inaugurated in the year 2001 and was constructed with the planned capacity of 2,292 inmates. That, at present the inmate strength is 4,400 and is presently overcrowded to the tune 200%. The overcrowding requires urgent measures of expansion to ease the burden. Additionally, segregation of certain categories of prisoners requires additional space for construction of high-security cells. As per various directives of the Government, the under-tr