Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M.NAGAPRASANNA
H.P.Ramesh, S/o. Late Panchaksharaiah – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka, Represented By Its Principle Secretary, Revenue Department – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ownership and claims for compensation for land use (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. arguments on entitlement to compensation (Para 2 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's observations on prior representations and orders (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. legal principles regarding property rights and delay in claims (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. conclusion and order for compensation (Para 12) |
ORDER :
The petitioners are before this Court calling in question an order dated 08.11.2021, passed by respondent No.2 denying payment of compensation for the usage of their lands in Survey No.51 of Haradagere Village and seeks a consequential mandamus to the respondents, to pay compensation for the land utilised, under the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows:
4. Sri Kishan G.S., learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the land of the petitioners admittedly is being utilised by constructing a government school and formation of a road. If the fact is admitted, it cannot be said that the petitioners would not be entitled to any compensation.
6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the le
The court held that delay does not negate the right to compensation for property unlawfully appropriated by the State, emphasizing the need for due process and just compensation under established law....
The duty to compensate upon land acquisition is a constitutional safeguard, ensuring no individual is deprived of property without legal due process and fair compensation, embodied in Article 300A.
Article 300A only limits powers of State that no person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law.
(1) State cannot shield itself behind ground of delay and laches in such a situation – There cannot be a limitation to doing justice.(2) Acquisition of land – Nobody can be deprived of liberty or pro....
The court affirmed that oral consent for land acquisition must be evidenced in writing, and deprivation of property without compensation violates constitutional rights.
Landowners are entitled to due process and compensation for property utilized by the State without formal acquisition, as under Article 300A of the Constitution.
Landowners cannot be deprived of their property without due process and just compensation, regardless of implied consent due to prolonged silence on compensation claims.
The right to property under Article 300-A mandates compensation for land acquisition, and the State cannot deprive landowners of their property without due process and compensation.
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
