The court ruled that land acquisition notifications become invalid once the related scheme is held to have lapsed or been abandoned.

ORAL ORDER

All these writ petitions are taken up together since common questions of law and fact are involved.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the material on record.

3. The land bearing Sy.No.8 (new No.8/1) in total measuring 1 acre 25 guntas situated at Alahalli village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, Bangalore, belonged to the petitioners' great grandfather namely late Muniyappa @ Yatgalappa @ Hottappa. The two children of the late Muniyappa namely Doddannaiah and Munimalli, acquired the same under a partition effected in O.S No.89/1965. The said land was notified for acquisition under the preliminary notification dated 17.11.1988 Gazetted on 19.11.1989 and a final notification under Section 19 of the BDA Act, 1976 on 22.07.1991 Gazetted on 27.07.1991, which included petitioners' schedule properties. One Doddannaiah and Pillappa, claiming to be the members of the family, filed Writ Petition No.3146/1994 pertaining to survey No.8/1 questioning the award, the said writ petition came to be dismissed.

4. It further appears that certain land owners challenged the preliminary notification and final notification dated 17.11.1988 and 19.11.1989 before this Court in the case of Shaikh Basheer and others -vs- State represented by its Commissioners and others W.P. No.4046/1993 & connected matters D.D. 27.09.1996 (Shaikh Basheer), wherein this Court observed as follows:

"5. In all these cases, the total extent of land involved is 102 acres and 84 guntas as submitted by the learned counsel for the BDA. Out of which the BDA has taken possession only in respect of 52 acres when the petition is pending before this Court. If that is the case, there is no need for the BDA to form any layout in these 52 acres.

For the reasons stated above, I pass the following order:-

The final notification issued under Section 19 (1) of the Act on 22.07.1991 insofar as it relates to the lands of the petitioners is quashed.

However, liberty is reserved to the BDA to proceed with the acquisition in accordance with law and such acquisition shall be completed within one year from today. If the petitioners have not filed any objections, they are permitted to do so within a year period of one month from today, without awaiting any notice from the BDA. The petitioners are also directed not to put up any construction for a period of one year from today".

5. The order passed by the learned single Judge was confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal and has attained finality. Pursuant thereto, the BDA issued a fresh final notification under Section 19 of the BDA Act, including the petitioners land which was Gazetted on 18.09.1997.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the subject lands were part of the scheme known as 'Jayaprakash Narayan Nagar, 9^th stage' (J.P.Nagar 9^th stage) for which preliminary notification dated 17.11.1988 and the final notification dated 22.07.1991 were issued. It is contended that in the case of Sri V. Venkatesh and others -vs- State of Karnataka and others W.P. No.1377 & 1382/2016 D.D. 21.04.2016 (V. Venkatesh), this Court declared that the scheme of the BDA relating to "J.P.Nagar 9^th Stage" had lapsed and accordingly quashed the acquisition proceedings in relation to the lands involved in that case.

7. Learned counsel further submits that the writ appeals preferred by the BDA in Writ Appeal Nos.187-188/2017 and Writ Appeal Nos.698-701/2018 against the order of the learned Single Judge were dismissed by the DivisionBench by order dated 10.04.2019, holding that the scheme was never implemented. The SLP preferred by the BDA in