Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
ANU SIVARAMAN, VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL
Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board Rep. By Its Chief Executive Officer – Appellant
Versus
A.V. Shivappa S of o Venkataramappa – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)
These appeals are filed by the appellants - Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (KIADB) and others under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, challenging the orders passed by the learned Single Judge. The particulars of the cases are as under:
2. The brief facts leading to the filing of these writ appeals are as under:
The respondent - State Government initiated the acquisition proceedings under the provision of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (for short 'the Act') by issuing the notifications under Section 3 (1), 1(3) and 28(1) of the Act notifying the schedule properties for acquisition for industrial purposes. The respondents/petitioners, who are owners of the land, being aggrieved that no further action was taken pursuant to the preliminary notification which was issued in the years 2009 and 2012 respectively, filed the respective writ petitions. The contention of the petitioners was that no final notification was issued for more than 12-14 years, which amounts to abandonment of acquisition proceedings. The petitioners have also placed reliance on the judgments rendered by the learne
Authorities must complete land acquisition proceedings within a reasonable timeframe; prolonged inaction constitutes a violation of constitutional rights under Article 300A.
Prolonged inaction in land acquisition proceedings for over 17 years renders the acquisition invalid, as timely conclusion is a component of property rights under Article 300A.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that once the Final Notification is issued under the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966, the land vests in the State, and objections ....
Inordinate delay of 14 years in land acquisition invalidates the process, necessitating quashing of prior notifications and ensuring entitlement to compensation under the 2013 Act.
The landowners are entitled to just compensation at current market value when delays in awarding compensation are not due to their actions.
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
