1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF MARCH 2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

WRIT PETITION No.24511 OF 2015 (LA-RES)

BETWEEN:

PARVATHAMMA

W/O KAMADASAPPA

AGED ABOUT YEARS

RESIDING AT NAGENAHALLI VILLAGE,

DODDERI HOBLI, MADHUGIRI TALUK

TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 132.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. KASHYAP.P.NAIK, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 .

THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA

HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE/HEAD QUARTERS AT

G 5 & 6, SECTOR-10, DWARAKA,

NEW DELHI-110075

ALSO HAVING ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT

SY NO.13, 14TH K M, NEAR DEEPAK BUS STOP

NAGASANDRA, MS RAMAIAH ENCLAVE

BANGALORE-TUMKUR ROAD (NH-4) BANGALORE-560073

2 .

THE UNION OF INDIA

REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

MINISTRY OF ROAD, TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS,

TRANSPORT BHAWAN,

NO.1,. PARLIAMENT STREET,

NEW DELHI-10001

3 .

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY TO

GOVERNMENT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,

M S BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001

4 .

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

TUMKUR DISTRICT

TUMKUR-572103

2

5 .

THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

NATIONAL HIGHWAY SUB-DIVISION

ATTACHED TO PWD OFFICE

KUNIGAL ROAD, TUMKUR TOWN-572 103.

6 .

THE CHIEF OFFICER

TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

MADHUGIRI TOWN

TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 132.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. SHILPA SHAH, ADVOCATE FOR R-1

SRI. SHYAM KOUNDINYA, ADVOCATE FOR R-6

SRI. A.C.BALARAJ, AGA FOR R-3 TO R-5)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE

CONSTITUTION

OF

INDIA

PRAYING

TO

RESTRAIN

THE

RESPONDENTS FROM PASSING ANY RESOLUTION OR ORDER

OR OTHERWISE ACTING ON ANY SUCH RESOLUTION OR

ORDER AND RESTRAINING THEM FROM DEMOLISHING OR

OTHERWISE INTERFERRING WITH THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY

OR ANY PORTION THEREOF, WITHOUT FOLLOWING THE

MANDATORY PROVISIONS UNDER THE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS

ACT, 1956, OR THE RIGHT OF FAIR COMPENSATION AND

TRANSPERANCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND

RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013 OR SUCH OTHER LAW'S AND ETC.

THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE

COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

In this petition, petitioner has sought for the following

reliefs:-

“ A)

Issue a writ of Mandamus or

direction or any other appropriate writ/restraining the

Respondents from passing any resolution or order or

3

otherwise acting on any such resolution or order and

restraining

them

from

demolishing

otherwise

interfering with the Schedule Property or any portion

thereof, without following the mandatory provisions

under the National Highways, Act, 1956, or the right

of Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land

Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act,

2013 or such other law/s; and

B) Grant such other relief/s as this Hon'ble

Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of

this Case, in the interest of justice and equity."

2. In addition to reiterating the various contentions

urged in the petition and referring to the documents

produced, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

respondents are illegally and high handedly attempting to

remove and demolish the existing structures on the

schedule property without following the due process of law

and hence, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the

present petition. In support of his contention, learned

counsel for the petitioner placed reliance in the cases of

S.V.Shubha vs. State of Karnataka - W.P.No.2920/2020

Dated 10.02.2020 and Dr.G.Rajagopala Reddy vs. State

of Karnataka - W.P.No.1377/2014 & connected matters

dated 09.03.2016.

4

3. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 - NHAI

submits that as averred in the statement of objections filed

by respondent No.1 - NHAI, the road in question is not

being maintained by respondent No.1, but it comes within

the jurisdiction of respondent Nos. 3 to 6.

4. Per contra, learned AGA for respondents 3 to 5

and learned counsel for respondent No.6 submit that they

would take necessa