SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

- 1 -

W.P.No.1461 of 2022 C/W W.P.No.1371 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS

WRIT PETITION NO. 1461 OF 2022 (KLR-RES)

C/W

WRIT PETITION NO. 1371 OF 2016 (KLR-RES)

IN W.P.NO. 1461 OF 2022

BETWEEN:

1.

SMT. RAJALAKSHMI

W/O LATE R.N ASHWATHA NARAYANA

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS

2.

SMT. R.A. SHARADHA

D/O LATE R.N. ASWATHA NARAYANA

AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS

3.

SRI. R.A. PUNEETH

S/O LATE R.N. ASWATHA NARAYANA

AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

4.

SRI.R.A. NARESH

S/O LATE R.N. ASWATHA NARAYANA

AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS

ALL ARE R/AT NO.8,

ASWATHA NARAYANA NILAYA

3RD CROSS, JYOTHINAGAR

AMBABHAVANI TEMPLE ROAD,

VIDYARANYAPURA POST

BANGALORE 560097

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. MADHUSUDHAN R NAIK, SENIOR COUNSEL

FOR SRI. JAGADEESH C K., ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by

JUANITA THEJESWINI

Location: HIGH COURT

OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

W.P.No.1461 of 2022 C/W W.P.No.1371 of 2016

AND:

1.

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M.S. BUILDING

AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,

BANGALORE 560 001

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISISONER

BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT

BEHIND KANDAYA BHAVANA

K.G. ROAD

BANGALORE 560009

3.

THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT (NORTH)

BEHIND KANDAYA BHAANA

K.G. ROAD,

BANGALORE 560009

4.

THE TAHSILDAR

BANGLAORE NORTH ADDTIONAL TALUK

HOTEL SHARAVATHI BUILDING, 3RD FLOOR

YELAHANKA NEW TOWN

BANGALORE 560064

5.

BANGALORE METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD

REPRESNETED BY ITS

MANAGING DIRECTOR

HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT

B.M.T.C COMPLEX

3RD FLOOR, K.H. ROAD,

SHANTHINAGAR

BANGALORE 560 027

6.

THE KARNATAKA INDUSTIRAL AREA

DEVELOPMENT BOARD-METRO

REPRESENTED BY ITS

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

NO.14/3, ARAVINDA BHAVANA,

NRUPATHUNGA ROAD

BANGALORE-560002.

…RESPONDENTS

- 3 -

W.P.No.1461 of 2022 C/W W.P.No.1371 of 2016

(BY SRI. SESHU V. HCGP, FOR R1 TO R4

SRI. NAGANAND S.S., SR. COUNSEL FOR

SRI. HARISH N.N., ADVOCATE FOR R5

SRI. P.V. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R6)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE

IMPUGNED LETTER/ORDER DTD 15.10.2020 VIDE ANNX-A AND

DIRECT/DECLARE TO THE R-2 AND R-4 DIRECTING THEM TO

IMPLEMENT THE ORDER/DIRECTION ISSUED BY THE R-3 THE

ORDER/DIRECTION ISSUED BY THE R-3 IN PROCEEDINGS

VIDE ANNX-E TO THE WRIT PETITION AND TO CONSIDER THE

REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONERS VIDE ANNX-L AND M.

AND ETC.

IN W.P.NO. 1371 OF 2016

BETWEEN:

1.

SMT. RAJALAKSHMI

W/O LATE R.N ASHWATHA NARAYANA

AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS

2.

SMT. R.A. SHARADHA

D/O LATE R.N. ASWATHA NARAYANA

AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS

3.

SRI. R.A. PUNITH

S/O LATE R.N. ASWATHA NARAYANA

AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS

4.

SRI.R.A. NARESH

S/O LATE R.N. ASWATHA NARAYANA

AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS

1 TO 4 ARE R/AT NO.8,

53/2, SHARADA NILAYA

4TH MAIN, MATTIKERE EXTENSION

BENGALURU- 560054.

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. NISHANTH A.V., ADVOCATE)

- 4 -

W.P.No.1461 of 2022 C/W W.P.No.1371 of 2016

AND:

1.

STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M.S. BUILDING

AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,

BANGALORE 560 001

REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISISONER

BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT

BANGALORE 560001

3.

THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT

BANGALORE

4.

THE TAHASILDAR

BANGLAORE NORTH ADDTIONAL TALUK

YELAHANKA, BANGALORE.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SESHU V. HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT

THE R4 TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDER DTD. 25.02.2013 IN

CASE NO.9 RRT (2) CR-2B/2001-02 PASSED BY THE SPECIAL

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER VIDE ANNX-D, IN SO FAR AS THE

SCHEDULE PROPERTY IS CONCERNED AND ETC.,

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY

HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

- 5 -

W.P.No.1461 of 2022 C/W W.P.No.1371 of 2016

COMMON ORDER

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

These two writ petitions are filed by the same parties

as petitioners. In W.P.No.1371/2016, the prayer is to issue

a writ of mandamus directing the respondent-Tahsildar,

Bangalore North Taluk, Yalahanka to comply with the

orders dated 25.02.2013 in case No.RRT (2) CR-2B/2001-

2002, passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner, insofar

as the schedule property is concerned. There are other

prayers also made in the said writ petition. During the

course of the said writ proceedings, the respondent-

Tahsildar is said to have handed over 18 acres and 01

gunta of land in Sy.No.79 of Shettigere village, Jala Hobli,

Yalahanka Taluk, excluding 4 acres and 39 guntas, to

respondent No.5-Bangalore Metro Rail Project Corporation

(hereinafter referred to as ‘BMRCL’ for short). Questioning

the said action of the Tahsildar, the subsequent writ

petition in W.P.No.1461/2022 was filed. A similar prayer

seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent-

- 6 -

W.P.No.1461 of 2022 C/W W.P.No.1371 of 2016

Tahsildar to follow the directions given in No.RRT(2)CR-

2B/2001-2002, is reiterated in the second petition.

2. Learned Senior Counsel Sri.Madhusudhan R Naik,

appearing

for

the

petitioners

submits

that

Sri.R.N.Ashwathanarayana purchased 20 acres and 05

guntas of land in an open action conducted by the State

Government through the revenue authorities. However, it

was found that there was some discrepancy in the

mentioning of Survey Numbers. To that extent there has

been some confusion as to whether the entire 20 acres

and 05 guntas was in Sy.No.78 or 79 or whether it

encompasses a portion in the two Survey Numbers.

Nevertheless,

when

the

issue

of

unauthorized

encroachment was raised on the floor of the House, a Joint

House Committee for detection of encroachment of

Government

land

in

Bangalore

Urban

under

the

Chairmanship of Sri.A.T.Ramaswamy was constituted by

the Government. The Joint House Committee submitted

two interim reports during February, 2007 and July, 2007.

- 7 -

W.P.No.1461 of 2022 C/W W.P.No.1371 of 2016

It appears that the committee detected large scale

encroachment on government land. The Government

constituted the Task Force for Recovery and Protection of

public

land

under

the

Chairmanship

of

B.V.Balasubramaniyan, IAS (Retired). In order to expedite

the process of removal of the encroachments and the

recovery of the encroached lands, the government created

three posts of the Special Deputy Commissioners for

Bangalore Urban District vide a Government Order No.RD

711 LGB 2009 (P), Bangalore, dated 04.06.2010. The

powers under Section 136(3) of the Karnataka Land

Revenue Act, 1946 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for

short) vested in the Deputy Commissioner was delegated

to the Special Deputy Commissioners in the newly created

posts vide a Government Notification dated 29.08.2012 for

the jurisdiction of Bangalore North and Bangalore North

(Additional) Taluks.

3. Consequent to the powers conferred on the

Special

Deputy

Commissioner,

the

Special

Deputy

- 8 -

W.P.No.1461 of 2022 C/W W.P.No.1371 of 2016

Commissioner, Bangalore North and Bangalore North

(Additional) Taluks conducted an enquiry and in terms of

the powers vested under Section 136(3) of the Act, the

Special Deputy Commissioner passed an order dated

25.02.2013. Learned Senior Counsel submits that in

terms

of

the

said

passed

by

Commissioner, it was found from the records that

guntas of land in an open auction. However, by virtue of

certain errors that had crept in the revenue records,

although what remained in Sy.No.78 was 4 acres and 12

guntas, however, the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore

District,

vide

Official

Memorandum

bearing

No.LND(1)/CR.256/1978-79,

dated

03.05.1979

has

ordered for public auction of 20 acres and 05 guntas of

land in Sy.No.78 of Shettigere village, in exercise of

powers under Rule 12(2) of the Karnataka Land Grant

Rules, 1969. However, it was also noticed in terms of the

sketch

prepared,

it

was

evidenced

- 9 -

Sri.R.Ashwathnarayana and his family members were in

occupation of land in Sy.No.79 also. Therefore, in order to

solve the problem, it was directed that the authority shall

accord approval for change of spot from Sy.No.78 to

Sy.No.79 in terms of the power conferred by the

on

Commissioner

vide

Government Circular No.RD 93 LGB 79 dated 20.03.1980.

Consequently, by the said order dated 25.02.2013, the

Special Deputy Commissioner directed the Tahsildar,

Bangalore North (Additional) Taluk, Bangalore, to initiate

action for phodi of Sy.No.78 and submit proposals to the

Deputy Commissioner for change of spot in respect of 15

acres and 33 guntas of land from Sy.No.78 to Sy.No.79 in

favour of Sri.R.N.Ashwathnarayana in terms of the order

dated 20.03.1980 and thereupon initiate proposal for the

phodi of land in Sy.No.79.

4. Learned Senior Counsel submits that however

since it was found that the powers exercisable under

Section 136(3) could not have been delegated to a Special

- 10 -

Deputy Commissioner, who is not in the cadre of IAS, the

State Government issued a Government Notification dated

10.10.2014 withdrawing the powers of the Special Deputy

Commissioner to deal with the matters pertaining to

Section 136(3) with retrospective effect. Learned Senior

Counsel would submit that although the grounds have

been raised in the writ petitions, challenging the validity of

the Notification dated 10.10.2014 to retrospectively

withdraw the powers which were conferred on the Special

Deputy Commissioner and thereby setting at naught the

orders passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner,

nevertheless, since the said notification dated 10.10.2014

and its validity are said to have been upheld by the

Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.51551-

52/2013, dated 26.08.2014, therefore, without pressing

on the validity of the Government Notification dated

10.10.2014, learned Senior Counsel would submit that if

similar directions are given as was done in the case of

SRI.N.RAMAMURTHY VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND

- 11 -

OTHERS,

W.P.No.16255/2018

dated

14.11.2018,

directing that the matter should be reconsidered by a

Deputy Commissioner of IAS cadre, it would suffice.

However, the learned Senior Counsel would bring to the

notice of this Court certain interim orders passed

restraining the revenue authorities from doing anything to

disturb the possession of the petitioners of the land in

question. Nevertheless, the Tahsildar has proceeded to

hand over the acquired land in terms of the impugned

communication dated 15.10.2020 at Annexure-A in

W.P.No.1461/2022.

Learned

Senior

Counsel

would

therefore submit that the action on the part of the

Tahsildar in taking upon himself the right to hand over the

land in question should be held illegal and quashed and

the petitioner is agreeable to say that he has voluntarily

handed over the possession of the acquired land to the

Karnataka

Industrial

Areas

Development

Board

(hereinafter referred to as ‘KIADB’, for short). Learned

Senior Counsel submits that the petitioners are not

- 12 -

challenging the acquisition proceedings, however, they are

entitled to seek compensation and if they are not satisfied

with the compensation, they are entitled to seek

enhancement of the compensation in accordance with law.

Learned

Senior

Counsel

Sri.S.S.Naganand,

appearing for respondent No.5-Bangalo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top