2005 Supreme(Kar) 273

Karnataka High Court
SHARADAMMA - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA - Respondent
Decided On : 04-15-05
W.P. : 1777 of 2005

Headnote:Exercise of powers by BDA

       EMINENT DOMAIN

       Exercise of powers by BDA -Jurisdiction - Lands acquired for public purpose - Provisions of Land Acquisition Act should be followed - Notification has to be issued by Government Authority cannot exercise powers of eminent domain.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: BDA is not constituted by elected members and it does not enjoy the freedom of taking decisions on policy matters. BDA is a subordinate of the Government and therefore cannot exercise the eminent domain power to acquire the lands for public purpose. Therefore, the Preliminary Notification should have been issued by the Government under Section 4 of the L.A. Act and not the BDA under Section 17 of the BDA Act.

       Cases Referred: ILR 2005 Kar 608; AIR 2002 SC 1574; AIR 1976 SC 2517; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1995 SC 142; 1981 (2) SCC 308; AIR 1963 SC 151 ; AIR 1955 Mad 610; 1962 Mys. L.J 409; AIR 1960 SC 1788; AIR 1969 SC 634; AIR 1972 SC 2683; AIR 1975 SC 394; 1978 (2) SCC 1; AIR 1978 SC 215; AIR 1984 SC 326; W.A. No. 72/2004 DD 28-2-05; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; 1996 (1) Mys. L.J 162 ; 1968 (2) Mys. L.J 48; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 2004(6) SCC 465.

       Followed: AIR 1991 SC 101; AIR 1966 SC 187; AIR 1993 SC 1804; 1993 (3) SCC 441; 1993 Suppl (2) SCC 565; 1990 (3) SCC 130; 1998 (4) SCC 626; 1998 (7) SCC 26; 1997 (5) SCC 201; 1997 (6) SCC 283; 1995 (4) SCC 469; 1995 SCC 762 ; 1994 (5) SCC 282; 1996 (3) SCC 75 ; AIR 1995 SC 966; 1990 (1) SCC 109 ; AIR 1979 SC 193; AIR 1953 SC 10 ; AIR 1966 SC 1987; AIR 1989 SC 38; AIR 1990 SC 1927; AIR 2003 SC 3057; AIR 1991 SC page 101; AIR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1999 Kar 2513; ILR 1994 Kar 992; AIR 1980 SC 2181; 2002 (7) SCC 564 ; 2000 (7) SCC 425; 2000 (8) SCC 462; 2002 (1) SCC 227 ; 2002 (7) SCC 564; AIR 1979 SC 49; AIR 1999 SC 1281; AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1963 SC 151; 33; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 1984 (4) SCC 612; AIR 1993 SC 1804; JT 2003 (5) SCC 509; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1975 SC 2016; AIR 1975 SC 2226; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1980 C 319; AIR 1954 SC 92; AIR 1952 SC 252 ; AIR 1951 SC 41 ; AIR 1995 SC 141; AIR 1953 SC 375; ILR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1964 SC 1284; AIR 1976 SC Page 1031; 1959 Supp (2) SCR 270: AIR 1959 SC 749 ; 1972 (3) SCR 881: AIR 1972 SC 1738; AIR 1997 SC 434; AIR 1996 SC 1316; AIR 1957 SC 297 ; AIR 1979 SC Page 898; AIR 1976 SC 2095; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1952 SC 75; AIR 1979 SC 478; AIR 1993 SC 477; AIR 1961 SC 343; AIR 1973 P&H 358 ; AIR 1971 Assam and Nagaland 1968; 1981(1) SCC 166; AIR 1986 SC 468 ; 1990 (1) SCC 520; 1996 (2) SCC 549; 1997 (1) SCC 134; AIR 1997 SC 1104; AIR 1997 SC 2167; AIR 1997 SC 2745; AIR 1995 SC 142; AIR 1986 SC Page 180; AIR 1963 SC 1890; AIR 1986 SC 180; AIR 1978 SC 597; 20 LR 779 (DB) ; AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1967 SC 1239 ; AIR 1999 SC 826; AIR 1975 SC 1787 ; AIR 1982 SC 33 ; AIR SCW 5751; AIR 1973 SC 689; AIR 1964 SC; AIR 1995 SC 2244.

       Amendment of Section 5-A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894

       LAND ACQUISITION (MYSORE EXTENSION AND AMENDMENT) ACT, 1961 - Amendment of Section 5-A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Requirement under - Acquisition of land by Bangalore Development Authority - Reports concerning - Not served on land owners - Is a serious statutory infirmity - Acquisition Proceedings void ab initio.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: As per Clause (c) of sub-section (2) of Section 5A as-amended by Land Acquisition (Mysore Extension and Amendment ) Act XVII of 1961, the fact of having submitted the report shall be communicated to the objectors to have their voice in the matter or to question the legality or correctness of the reports. Such reports are neither served nor communicated to the objectors, which is a serious statutory infirmity. This has vitiated the enquiry and the further action thereon is ab-intio void.

       Applicability

       ESTOPPEL

       Applicability- Executive orders issued proposing acquisition of land for group housing and I.T. Park - Such orders cannot have precedence over Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Hence, Government cannot hold - Out such a promise - Acquisition at present is not hit by promissory estoppel.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: It is no doubt true that the Government has passed the aforementioned orders. What is sanctioned in the GO. dated 17-1-2001 is sanction for Group Housing. In GO. dated 1-6-1995 sanction is accorded for establishing an IT Park. There is no promise held-out by the Government that the lands in question will not be acquired for public purpose. Public purpose is paramount consideration. In the absence of such a categorical promise or assurance, petitioners cannot claim "promissory estoppel" against the Government or the BDA.

       Cases Referred: ILR 2005 Kar 608; AIR 2002 SC 1574; AIR 1976 SC 2517; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1995 SC 142; 1981 (2) SCC 308; AIR 1963 SC 151 ; AIR 1955 Mad 610; 1962 Mys. L.J 409; AIR 1960 SC 1788; AIR 1969 SC 634; AIR 1972 SC 2683; AIR 1975 SC 394; 1978 (2) SCC 1; AIR 1978 SC 215; AIR 1984 SC 326; W.A. No. 72/2004 DD 28-2-05; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; 1996 (1) Mys. L.J 162 ; 1968 (2) Mys. L.J 48; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 2004(6) SCC 465.

       Followed: AIR 1991 SC 101; AIR 1966 SC 187; AIR 1993 SC 1804; 1993 (3) SCC 441; 1993 Suppl (2) SCC 565; 1990 (3) SCC 130; 1998 (4) SCC 626; 1998 (7) SCC 26; 1997 (5) SCC 201; 1997 (6) SCC 283; 1995 (4) SCC 469; 1995 SCC 762 ; 1994 (5) SCC 282; 1996 (3) SCC 75 ; AIR 1995 SC 966; 1990 (1) SCC 109 ; AIR 1979 SC 193; AIR 1953 SC 10 ; AIR 1966 SC 1987; AIR 1989 SC 38; AIR 1990 SC 1927; AIR 2003 SC 3057; AIR 1991 SC page 101; AIR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1999 Kar 2513; ILR 1994 Kar 992; AIR 1980 SC 2181; 2002 (7) SCC 564 ; 2000 (7) SCC 425; 2000 (8) SCC 462; 2002 (1) SCC 227 ; 2002 (7) SCC 564; AIR 1979 SC 49; AIR 1999 SC 1281; AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1963 SC 151; 33; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 1984 (4) SCC 612; AIR 1993 SC 1804; JT 2003 (5) SCC 509; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1975 SC 2016; AIR 1975 SC 2226; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1980 C 319; AIR 1954 SC 92; AIR 1952 SC 252 ; AIR 1951 SC 41 ; AIR 1995 SC 141; AIR 1953 SC 375; ILR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1964 SC 1284; AIR 1976 SC Page 1031; 1959 Supp (2) SCR 270: AIR 1959 SC 749 ; 1972 (3) SCR 881: AIR 1972 SC 1738; AIR 1997 SC 434; AIR 1996 SC 1316; AIR 1957 SC 297 ; AIR 1979 SC Page 898; AIR 1976 SC 2095; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1952 SC 75; AIR 1979 SC 478; AIR 1993 SC 477; AIR 1961 SC 343; AIR 1973 P&H 358 ; AIR 1971 Assam and Nagaland 1968; 1981(1) SCC 166; AIR 1986 SC 468 ; 1990 (1) SCC 520; 1996 (2) SCC 549; 1997 (1) SCC 134; AIR 1997 SC 1104; AIR 1997 SC 2167; AIR 1997 SC 2745; AIR 1995 SC 142; AIR 1986 SC Page 180; AIR 1963 SC 1890; AIR 1986 SC 180; AIR 1978 SC 597; 20 LR 779 (DB) ; AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1967 SC 1239 ; AIR 1999 SC 826; AIR 1975 SC 1787 ; AIR 1982 SC 33 ; AIR SCW 5751; AIR 1973 SC 689; AIR 1964 SC; AIR 1995 SC 2244.

       Specification of Bangalore Metropolitan Area

       KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT (TRANSACTION OF BUSINESS) RULES,1977 - Rule 24(1) - Specification of Bangalore Metropolitan Area - Specified by Government under the rules by issuing a Notification - Legality.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: The Notification issued by the State Government under Section 2(c) of BDA Act specifying "Bangalore Metropolitan area" exercising the power under the Karnataka Government (Transaction of Business) Rules, 1977 framed under Article 166(3) of the Constitution, cannot have precedence over the public notification that would be published by the Governor as provided under Article 243-P(c) of the Constitution. If such notification is given effect to, it will have the effect of over-riding the Constitutional provision.

       Post facto approval of Scheme by cabinet

       Rule 24(1) - Post facto approval of Scheme by cabinet - Chief Minister himself approved the scheme - Brought before Cabinet for post facto approval - Approved by Cabinet without considering objections to preliminary notification - Scheme is not legal and valid.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: After publication of final notification declaring that the lands are required for the implementation of the scheme and during the pendency of these matters, it is seen in Volume ill of the Government files that a Note was put-up on 11-8-2004 to place the matter before the Cabinet. It is stated that "as called for by the CM s office on 11-3-2004, file was returned to the Department on 16-5-2004. The file was submitted to the CM on 14-6-2004. Since the file was 7not received till 11-8-2004, the subject (for Cabinet approval) was moved in a separate file, for which the Chief Minister granted approval. Accordingly, the matter was brought before the Cabinet for post facto sanction for the administrative approval granted on 21-2-2004 under Section 18(3) of the BDA Act. In the Cabinet Meeting held on 30-8-2004 post-facto sanction was accorded to the proposal without consideration of the objections filed to Preliminary Notification and other legal aspects and in the absence of Scheme Plan.

       Acquisition of land - KARNATAKA LAND REFORMS ACT, 1961 - Section 63 - Acquisition of land - Executive orders issued proposing acquisition of land for group housing and I.T. Park - Held, such executive orders contravenes the provisions of the Act.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: L.A. Act being a special enactment exclusively enacted under entry 42 of List II of Seventh Schedule of the Constitution with the Assent of the president, for matters relating to acquisition of lands, the executive orders passed by the State Government cannot have preference. Such executive orders relatable to Article 162 of the Constitution contrary to the special enactments cannot have the effect of over-riding the special enactment. The executive order of the State shall not have statutory force when the field is occupied by enactment. The Government orders relied upon by some of the petitioners are contrary to the provisions of Karnataka Land Reforms Act, KMC Act, K.M. Act.

       Sale of agricultural lands after conversion

       KARNATAKA LAND REFORMS ACT, 1961- Section 109 - Sale of agricultural lands after conversion - Permission not obtained from Government by owners - Legality of conversion and sale.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: The authorities, namely the Deputy Commissioner or the Tahsildar, have granted conversion of lands which are included in the CDP indiscriminately without applying their mind to the provisions of the aforementioned statutes. The converted lands have been sold to nonagriculturists who are barred to own agricultural lands under Karnataka Land Reforms Act without obtaining permission of the State Government as provided under Section 109 of KL. Reforms Act. The converted lands have been use for non-agricultural purposes by large number of persons without approval of the Planning Authority. Such things are happening day-in and day-out to circumvent the existing laws. The non-agriculturists can hold limited extent of lands as provided under Section 63(7) of KL. Reforms Act for the purposes mentioned therein. Therefore, the converting authorities should not pass conversion orders in respect of the remaining lands which are proposed for acquisition and shown as conurbation area in the CDP. . For the reasons stated above, it is held that the conversion orders passed are not in conformity with sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 95 of KL. Revenue Act and there is violation of other statutory provisions governing the formation of lay-outs and construction of houses.

       Post facto approval of Scheme by Cabinet

       BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT, 1976 - Post facto approval of Scheme by Cabinet - Chief Minister himself approved the scheme - Brought before Cabinet for post facto approval - Approved by cabinet without considering objections to preliminary notification - Scheme is not legal and valid.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: After publication of final notification declaring that the lands are required for the implementation of the scheme and during the pendency of these matters, it is seen in Volume ill of the Government files that a Note was put-up on 11-8-2004 to place the matter before the Cabinet. It is stated that "as called for by the CM s office on 11-3-2004, file was returned to the Department on 16-5-2004. The file was submitted to the CM on 14-6-2004. Since the file was not received till 11-8-2004, the subject (for Cabinet approval) was moved in a separate file, for which the Chief Minister granted approval. Accordingly, the matter was brought before the Cabinet for post facto sanction for the administrative approval granted on 21-2-2004 under Section 18(3) of the BDA Act. In the Cabinet Meeting held on 30-8-2004 post-facto sanction was accorded to the proposal without consideration of the objections filed to Preliminary Notification and other legal aspects and in the absence of Scheme Plan.

       Cases Referred: ILR 2005 Kar 608; AIR 2002 SC 1574; AIR 1976 SC 2517; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1995 SC 142; AIR 1963 SC 151; 1981 (2) SCC 308; AIR 1955 Mad 610; 1962 Mys. L.J 409; AIR 1960 SC 1788; AIR 1969 SC 634; AIR 1972 SC 2683; AIR 1975 SC 394; 1978 (2) SCC 1; AIR 1978 SC 215; AIR 1984 SC 326; W.A. No. 72/2004 DD 28-2-05; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; 1996 (1) Mys. L.J 162; 1968 (2) Mys. L.J 48; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 2004(6) SCC 465 .

       Followed: AIR 1991 SC 101; AIR 1966 SC 187; AIR 1993 SC 1804; 1993 (3) SCC 441 ; 1993 Suppl (2) SCC 565; 1990 (3) SCC 130 ; 1998 (4) SCC 626; 1998 (7) SCC 26; 1997 (5) SCC 201; 1997 (6) SCC 283 ; 1995 (4) SCC 469; 1995 SCC 762 ; 1994 (5) SCC 282; 1996 (3) SCC 75; AIR 1995 SC 966; 1990 (1) SCC 109; AIR 1979 SC 193; AIR 1953 SC 10; AIR 1966 SC 1987.AIR 1989 SC 38; AIR 1990 SC 1927 ; AIR 2003 SC 3057; AIR 1991 SC 101; AIR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1999 Kar 2513; ILR 1994 Kar 992; AIR 1980 SC 2181 ; 2002 (7) SCC 564; 2000 (7) SCC 425; 2000 (8) SCC 462; 2002 (1) SCC 227; 2002 (7) SCC 564; AIR 1979 SC 49; AIR 1999 SC 1281; AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1963 SC 151; 33; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 1984 (4) SCC 612; AIR 1993 SC 1804; JT 2003 (5) SCC 509; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1975 SC 2016; AIR 1975 SC 2226; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1980 C 319; AIR 1954 SC 92; AIR 1952 SC 252; AIR 1951 SC 41; AIR 1995 SC 141; AIR 1953 SC 375; ILR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1964 SC 1284; AIR 1976 SC Page 1031; 1959 Supp (2) SCR 270: AIR 1959 SC 749; 1972 (3) SCR 881: AIR 1972 SC 1738; AIR 1997 SC 434; AIR 1996 SC 1316; AIR 1957 SC 297; AIR 1979 SC Page 898; AIR 1976 SC 2095; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1952 SC 75; AIR 1979 SC 478; AIR 1993 SC 477; AIR 1961 SC 343; AIR 1973 P&H 358; AIR 1971 Assam and Nagaland 1968; 1981(1) SCC 166; AIR 1986 SC 468; 1990 (1) SCC 520; 1996 (2) SCC 549; 1997 (1) SCC 134; AIR 1997 SC 1104 ; AIR 1997 SC 2167; AIR 1997 SC 2745; AIR 1995 SC 142; AIR 1963 SC 1890; AIR 1986 SC 180; AIR 1978 SC 597; 20 LR 779 (DB); AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1967 SC 1239; AIR 1999 SC 826; AIR 1975 SC 1787; AIR 1982 SC 33; AIR SCW 5751; AIR 1973 SC 689; AIR 1964 SC; AIR 1995 SC 2244.

       Approval of scheme

       BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT, 1976 - Approval of scheme - Finalisation of scheme is a pre-requirement - Cabinet approval - Not obtained - Chief Minister himself approved the scheme - Action amounts to not only legal mala fides but also legal malice.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: The BDA has not at all finalised the Scheme Plan which is the basic requirement of a developmental scheme. In the absence of Scheme Plan, it is quite un-understandable as to how the BDA approved the scheme and issued the preliminary notification. Plan is the elementary document for the execution of any developmental scheme. It is very elementary, essential and basic document. Without such a plan, the BDA proceeded to implement the scheme. That apart, no modified scheme was furnished to the Government except showing the reduction of total extent of the land proposed to be acquired. Even the acreage furnished was also wrong, as has been observed above. The proposal made to the Government by the BDA for sanction of the Scheme is bad in law for non-compliance of the provisions of Section 18(1) of the BDA Act. There is total non-application of mind in the matter of framing the scheme by the BDA. Therefore, it has to be held that scheme proposed was not proper. The same is not legal and valid

       Equal protection of laws

       BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT, 1976 - Equal protection of laws - Acquisition of lands by authority other than by agreement - Provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to be applied to extend equal protection of laws, to avoid discrimination - Words as for as applicable does not mean non-application of Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: Even in the BDA Act also Section 36( 1) is provided. Merely because the words "so far as they are applicable" is mentioned, it cannot be said that provisions of L.A. Act are not applicable. "So far as they are applicable" means the provisions of L.A. Act shall be applied to the maximum extent and to the close proximity of the matter. There is no bar or exclusion for application of provisions of L.A. Act. Since the acquisition of lands is for public purpose, eminent domain power cannot be exercised under the BDA Act.

       Legality of specification of Bangalore Metropolitan Area

       BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT, 1976 - Legality of specification of Bangalore Metropolitan Area - Government issued Notification under the Karnataka Government (Trans-action of Business) Rules, 1977 specifying Bangalore Metropolitan Area - Procedure as provided under Article 243-P(C) of the Constitution - Not followed - Legality.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: The Notification issued by the State Government under Section 2( c) of BDA Act specifying "Bangalore Metropolitan area" exercising the power under the Karnataka Government (Transaction of Business ) Rules, 1977 framed under Article 166(3) of the Constitution, cannot have precedence over the public notification that would be published by the Governor as provided under Article 243-P(c) of the Constitution. If such notification is given effect to, it will have the effect of over-riding the Constitutional provision.

       Validity of preliminary notification

       BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT, 1976 - Validity of preliminary notification - Lands acquired for public purpose - provisions of Land Acquisition should be followed - Notification has to be issued by Government -Authority cannot exercise powers of eminent domain.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: BDA is not constituted by elected members and it does not enjoy the freedom of taking decisions on policy matters. BDA is a subordinate of the Government and therefore cannot exercise the eminent domain power to acquire the lands for public purpose. Therefore, the Preliminary Notification should have been issued by the Government under Section 4 of the L.A. Act and not the BDA under Section 17 of the BDA Act.

       Effect of constitution

       BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT, 1976 - Section 2(C) - Effect of constitution - Provision 2 (C) of the Act is in conflict of Part IX of Constitution - Not repealed - After Constitution (74th Amendment) Act, 1992, by force of law the provision is no more in existence in the State.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: In view of Article 243-ZF of the Constitution, the definition of Bangalore Metropolitan Area" in Section 2(c) of BDA Act being inconsistent with the provisions of Part IX-A of the Constitution, it was in force for a period of one year only from the commencement of Constitution (Seventy-fourth Amendment Act. 1992 and thereafter it is no more in the statute. The reason is, the definition in BDA Act was neither amended nor repealed. Thus, the definition of "Bangalore Metropolitan Area" in Section 2(c) of the BDA Act, by operation of law, automatically stood repealed after the expiry of one year from the commencement of Constitution 74th Amendment. Therefore, the definition in Section 2(c) of the BDA Act shall be treated as no more in the BDA Act. In view of this also, "Metropolitan Area" shall be the area specified by the Governor by public notification under Clause (c) of Article 243-P of the Constitution and not as defined in Section 2(c) of the BDA Act, which is no more in the statute by virtue of the aforementioned Article of the Constitution.

       Jurisdiction of authority

       BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT, 1976 - Section 14 - Jurisdiction of authority - Preamble of the Act and Section 14 are in conflict with Section 81-B of Karnataka Town And Country Planning Act, 1961.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: The Preamble and Sections 14 of the BDA Act as also Section 81-B of Planning Act are conflicting with each other in so far as the jurisdiction of BDA over Bangalore Metropolitan Area is concerned. While Section 81-B of the Planning Act restricts its jurisdiction only to Bangalore City Area, the Preamble of BDA Act extends the jurisdiction to adjacent areas and Section 14 enlarges the jurisdiction to Bangalore Metropolitan Area. Even Section 36( 1) extends the jurisdiction for acquisition of lands within or without the Bangalore Metropolitan Area. Keeping in view these conflicting provisions, the Court proceeds to find-out the actual jurisdiction of BDA in so far as the developmental Scheme in question is concerned.

       Infrastructure

       BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT, 1976 - Section 16 - Infrastructure - Scheme to provide for - Even if provided, non-feasibility vitiates the scheme.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: It is no doubt true that in the scheme BDA has provided for infrastructures like water, electricity, civil amenities etc., But, it is not mentioned how the Bangalore Water Supply and Severage Board will augment the water requirement, how the additional electricity for the layout will be provided, the transport facilities, hospital, police station school/college and other public offices. The Government has made it clear that it is not responsible for any financial requirements. Mere formation of sites making provision for water, electricity, sanitary and other amenities will not serve the purpose. Laying water pipes will not bring water to the layout unless arrangement for supply is made. The BWSSB is already unable to cope-up with the present demand. For providing drinking water to such a big layout, another Phase of Cauvery has to be implemented. Otherwise, water cannot be supplied to the proposed layout. So also the other facilities. Mere formation of roads will not provide transport facility of the locality. The State Transport Department must be in a position to provide additional busses. The Electricity Department is introducing load shedding. How power will be supplied to the layout, is not forthcoming. These aspects are not at all considered while framing the scheme in question.

       Infrastructure

       BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT, 1976 - Section 16 - Infrastructure - Scheme to provide for - Even if provided, non-feasibility vitiates the scheme.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: It is no doubt true that in the scheme BDA has provided for infrastructures like water, electricity, civil amenities etc., But, it is not mentioned how the Bangalore Water Supply and Severage Board will augment the water requirement, how the additional electricity for the layout will be provided, the transport facilities, hospital, police station school/college and other public offices. The Government has made it clear that it is not responsible for any financial requirements. Mere formation of sites making provision for water, electricity, sanitary and other amenities will not serve the purpose. Laying water pipes will not bring water to the layout unless arrangement for supply is made. The BWSSB is already unable to cope-up with the present demand. For providing drinking water to such a big layout, another Phase of Cauvery has to be implemented. Otherwise, water cannot be supplied to the proposed layout. So also the other facilities. Mere formation of roads will not provide transport facility of the locality. The State Transport Department must be in a position to provide additional busses. The Electricity Department is introducing load shedding. How power will be supplied to the layout, is not forthcoming. These aspects are not at all considered while framing the scheme in question.

       Cases Referred:

       Referred: 1981 (2) SCC 308; AIR 1963 SC 151; AIR 1955 Mad 610; 1962 Mys. L.J 409; AIR 1960 SC 1788; AIR 1969 SC 634; AIR 1972 SC 2683; AIR 1975 SC 394; 1978 (2) SCC 1; AIR 1978 SC 215; AIR 1984 SC 326; ILR 2005 Kar 608; AIR 2002 SC 1574; AIR 1976 SC 2517; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1995 SC 142; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; 1996 (1) Mys. L.J 162; AIR 1999 SC 826; 1968 (2) Mys. L.J 48; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 2004(6) SCC 465.

       Followed: AIR 1991 SC 101; AIR 1966 SC 187; AIR 1993 SC 1804; 1993 (3) SCC 441; 1993 Suppl (2) SCC 565; 1990 (3) SCC 130; 1998 (4) SCC 626; 1998 (7) SCC 26; 1997 (5) SCC 201; 1997 (6) SCC 283 ; 1995 (4) SCC 469; 1995 SCC 762; 1994 (5) SCC 282; 1996 (3) SCC 75; AIR 1995 SC 966; 1990 (1) SCC 109; AIR 1979 SC 193; AIR 1953 SC 10; AIR 1966 SC 1987; AIR 1989 SC 38; AIR 1990 SC 1927 ; AIR 2003 SC 3057; AIR 1991 SC page 101; AIR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1999 Kar 2513; ILR 1994 Kar 992; AIR 1980 SC 2181; 2002 (7) SCC 564; 2000 (7) SCC 425 ; 2000 (8) SCC 462; 2002 (1) SCC 227; 2002 (7) SCC 564; AIR 1979 SC 49; AIR 1999 SC 1281; AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1963 SC 151; 33; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 1984 (4) SCC 612; AIR 1993 SC 1804; JT 2003 (5) SCC 509; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1975 SC 2016; AIR 1975 SC 2226 ; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1980 SC 319; AIR 1954 SC 92; AIR 1952 SC 252; AIR 1951 SC 41; AIR 1995 SC 141; AIR 1953 SC 375; ILR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1964 SC 1284; AIR 1976 SC Page 1031; 1959 Supp (2) SCR 270: AIR 1959 SC 749; 1972 (3) SCR 881: AIR 1972 SC 1738; AIR 1997 SC 434; AIR 1996 SC 1316; AIR 1957 SC 297; AIR 1979 SC Page 898; AIR 1976 SC 2095; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1952 SC 75; AIR 1979 SC 478; AIR 1993 SC 477; AIR 1961 SC 343; AIR 1973 P&H 358; AIR 1971 Assam and Nagaland 1968; 1981(1) SCC 166; AIR 1986 SC 468; 1990 (1) SCC 520; 1996 (2) SCC 549; 1997 (1) SCC 134; AIR 1997 SC 1104; AIR 1997 SC 2167; AIR 1997 SC 2745; AIR 1995 SC 142; AIR 1986 SC Page 180; AIR 1963 SC 1890; AIR 1986 SC 180; AIR 1978 SC 597; 20 LR 779 (DB); AIR 1976 SC 437 AIR 1967 SC 1239; AIR 1975 SC 1787; AIR 1982 SC 33; AIR SCW 5751; AIR 1973 SC 689; AIR 1964 SC; AIR 1995 SC 2244.

       Powers of Commissioner of the Authority

       BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT, 1976 - Section 17 - Powers of Commissioner of the Authority - Has no power to issue preliminary notification for acquisition of land - Nor the Authority can delegate such powers - Hence, he cannot authorise his sub-ordinates to enter the lands in question.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: Under sub-section (2) of Section 4 of L.A. Act only the officer authorised by the Government is permitted to discharge the functions. Therefore, the Commissioner of BDA, is not at all competent to issue the preliminary notification, cannot authorise the Additional Land Acquisition Officer to perform the duties specified in Section 4(2) of the L.A. Act. Even the BDA also cannot delegate the power to its Commissioner to discharge the said functions under Section 17 of the BDA Act read with Section 4(2) of L.A. Act. That being so, the Commissioner of BDA could not have empowered his subordinates in the Preliminary Notification to discharge the said functions.

       Principles of natural justice

       BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT, 1976 - Section 17 - Principles of natural justice - Acquisition of land by the Authority - Assistant Commissioner did not conduct enquiry - Officials of the Authority conducted enquiry - Procedure under Section 5-A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Not followed - Same Procedure followed in every case - Held, it is only an empty formality and violate principles of natural justice.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: Enquiries were not conducted by the Assistant Commissioner as provided under Section 5-A of the L.A. Act but Were conducted by the Additional Land Acquisition Officers of the BDA, who are not the Assistant Commissioners of the sub-division. They were appointed by the Commissioner of BDA who is not competent to do so. The objections were not properly considered. Opportunity of hearing was not given to the objectors, which is mandatory. The acquisition of lands will entail serious civil consequences and therefore principles of natural justice should be read into the provisions of Section 17 of the BDA Act. There is no compliance of principles of natural justice.

       Transfer of acquired land to the Authority

       BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT, 1976 - Section 36(3) -Transfer of acquired land to the Authority - Pre-requirement - Taking over possession should be notified under Section 16 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Cost of acquisition has to be paid by Bangalore Development Authority - Then, Deputy Commissioner should transfer land - Formation of sites before such transfer is not permissible.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: It is pertinent to note the Notifications under Section 16(2) of L.A. Act are not yet published in the Gazette for having taken possession of the lands by the Deputy Commissioner. On the other hand, a perusal of the original files shows that possession of the lands were alleged to have been taken by the Land Acquisition Officer of the BDA. Even for that also, the signatures of the owners are not obtained. That a part, it is even not placed on record that the BDA has deposited the cost of acquisition and agreed to pay further costs, if any, as provided in Section 36(3) of BDA Act. The Deputy Commissioner has not transferred the lands to BDA. From the original files it is seen that Notices under Sections 9 and 10 of L.A. Act have been merely issued. It is not even stated that the notices have been duly served on the concerned persons. The procedure contemplated is not followed. Mere taking symbolic possession, which is not permissible in law.

       Removal of conditions for allotment of sites

       BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT, 1976 - Section 38 -Removal of conditions for allotment of sites - Amendment to rules -Made, conditions of allotment removed enabling allottees to deal with allotted sites in their own way - Legality - Held, such removal of conditions would frustrate the very object of the Authority Act.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: Section 38 of the BDA Act stipulates that the BDA has power to lease, sell or otherwise transfer any of its properties subject to such restrictions, conditions and limitations. By virtue of the aforesaid amendments made to the Allotment Rules, Section 38 of the BDA Act has been made redundant. Such a thing is impermissible in law. Rules being subordinate to Act, they cannot have the over-riding the effect of provisions of the Act.

       Robbing Peter and paying to Paul

       BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT (ALLOTMENT OF SITES) RULES, 1984 - Rule 13 - Robbing Peter and paying to Paul - Vast extents of lands acquired by authority in the guise of providing sites to needy persons - Payment of compensation to owners - Takes its own time - Allottees, taking advantage of amended rules sell the sites after allotment is completed and make profit - This is nothing but robbing Peter and paying Paul.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: The allottees of the sites, immediately after payment of value of the sites, acquire absolute ownership taking advantage of the amended Rules 13 and 14 of Allotment Rules and sell away the sites far higher price. The land owners, who have lost their lands" have to wait far years to receive compensation. In the garb of "public purpose", affluent persons enrich and poor agriculturists lose everything. While lands involved in 16 villages are proposed far the project, BDA or the Government have not thought of any rehabilitation scheme of these villagers who will be displaced. They lose their residence, occupation and livelihood and the education of their children. Mere payment of compensation will not serve the purpose. In the guise of providing shelter to site-less or house-less persons, the owners of immovable property are made land-less as also jab-less. That amounts to robbing Peter and paying to. Paul.

       Cases Referred: 1981 (2) SCC 308; AIR 1963 SC 151; AIR 1955 Mad 610; 1962 Mys. L.J 409; AIR 1960 SC 1788; AIR 1969 SC 634; AIR 1972 SC 2683; AIR 1975 SC 394; 1978 (2) SCC 1; AIR 1978 SC 215; AIR 1984 SC 326; ILR 2005 Kar 608; AIR 2002 SC 1574; AIR 1976 SC 2517; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1995 SC 142; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; 1996 (1) Mys. L.J 162; AIR 1999 SC 826; 1968 (2) Mys. L.J 48; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 2004(6) SCC 465.

       Followed: AIR 1991 SC 101; AIR 1966 SC 187; AIR 1993 SC 1804; 1993 (3) SCC 441; 1993 Suppl (2) SCC 565; 1990 (3) SCC 130; 1998 (4) SCC 626; 1998 (7) SCC 26; 1997 (5) SCC 201; 1997 (6) SCC 283 ; 1995 (4) SCC 469; 1995 SCC 762; 1994 (5) SCC 282; 1996 (3) SCC 75; AIR 1995 SC 966; 1990 (1) SCC 109; AIR 1979 SC 193; AIR 1953 SC 10; AIR 1966 SC 1987; AIR 1989 SC 38; AIR 1990 SC 1927 ; AIR 2003 SC 3057; AIR 1991 SC page 101; AIR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1999 Kar 2513; ILR 1994 Kar 992; AIR 1980 SC 2181; 2002 (7) SCC 564; 2000 (7) SCC 425 ; 2000 (8) SCC 462; 2002 (1) SCC 227; 2002 (7) SCC 564; AIR 1979 SC 49; AIR 1999 SC 1281; AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1963 SC 151; 33; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 1984 (4) SCC 612; AIR 1993 SC 1804; JT 2003 (5) SCC 509; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1975 SC 2016; AIR 1975 SC 2226 ; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1980 SC 319; AIR 1954 SC 92; AIR 1952 SC 252; AIR 1951 SC 41; AIR 1995 SC 141; AIR 1953 SC 375; ILR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1964 SC 1284; AIR 1976 SC Page 1031; 1959 Supp (2) SCR 270: AIR 1959 SC 749; 1972 (3) SCR 881: AIR 1972 SC 1738; AIR 1997 SC 434; AIR 1996 SC 1316; AIR 1957 SC 297; AIR 1979 SC Page 898; AIR 1976 SC 2095; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1952 SC 75; AIR 1979 SC 478; AIR 1993 SC 477; AIR 1961 SC 343; AIR 1973 P&H 358; AIR 1971 Assam and Nagaland 1968; 1981(1) SCC 166; AIR 1986 SC 468; 1990 (1) SCC 520; 1996 (2) SCC 549; 1997 (1) SCC 134; AIR 1997 SC 1104; AIR 1997 SC 2167; AIR 1997 SC 2745; AIR 1995 SC 142; AIR 1986 SC Page 180; AIR 1963 SC 1890; AIR 1986 SC 180; AIR 1978 SC 597; 20 LR 779 (DB); AIR 1976 SC 437 AIR 1967 SC 1239; AIR 1975 SC 1787; AIR 1982 SC 33; AIR SCW 5751; AIR 1973 SC 689; AIR 1964 SC; AIR 1995 SC 2244.

       Removal of conditions for allotment of sites

       BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT (ALLOTMENT OF SITES) RULES, 1984 - Rule 13 - Removal of conditions for allotment of sites - Amendment to rules - Made, conditions of allotment removed enabling allottees to deal with allotted sites in their own way - Legality - Held, such removal of conditions would frustrate the very object of Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1975.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: By virtue of the amendments made to Allotment Rules, the allottees can get the sale deeds executed in their favour immediately after payment of sital value and acquire absolute right over the site. Thereafter, they can sell the site to any prospecting buyer for higher value. As a result of this, the BDA has no control over the allottee of the site. An allottee of a site can sell the allotted site and again apply for allotment of site. In this manner, the demand for allotment of sites will be rising. To meet such a repeated demand, the BDA has to form new layouts. This will defeat the very purpose of allotment of site. The object is to provide site to siteless persons. On account of the removal of the conditions and restrictions on sale or transfer of allotted site, the allottee sell away the allotted sites and again become siteless persons. On the other hand, persons affordable will buy any number of sites and have monopoly over the same. Without there being any conditions and restrictions on the allotted sites, the allottees can use the site in any manner they like and BDA cannot do anything and it will be a mute spectator.

       Repercussions of

       BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT (ALLOTMENT OF SITES) RULES, 1984 - Rule 14 -Repercussions of - Allottees taking advantage of rules - Effect on land owners whose lands were acquired and layout formed. See, Rule 13.

       CONSTITUTION OF INDIA - Constitution Of India - Discrimination - Article 14 -Discrimination -Proposal for acquisition of land - Certain lands deleted - Adjacent or contiguous lands not proposed - No valid reasons assigned by authority - Proposal hit by Article 14. [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: The KIADB has proposed to acquire these lands for the said purpose. Strangely, the BDA has not proposed to acquire the lands marked in Yellow colour and the lands marked in Green colour have been excluded in the final notification. This is in respect of one batch of writ petitions. Similar facts are pleaded in several other writ petitions furnishing the survey numbers of contiguous lands. It is also stated that some of the properties of the petitioners are developed but despite such development they have been acquired indiscriminately. It is alleged that BDA has not acquired the adjacent lands or lands contiguous and the acquisition proposed have been deleted in respect of some other lands without any valid reason which is illegal. Therefore, acquisition of the lands in question and non-acquisition or deletion from acquisition of some other lands situated in the same vicinity or area, amounts to discrimination and the same is arbitrary.

       Cases Referred: ILR 2005 Kar 608; AIR 2002 SC 1574; AIR 1976 SC 2517; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1995 SC 142; 1981 (2) SCC 308; AIR 1963 SC 151; AIR 1955 Mad 610; 1962 Mys. L.J 409; AIR 1960 SC 1788; AIR 1969 SC 634; AIR 1972 SC 2683; AIR 1975 SC 394; 1978 (2) SCC 1; AIR 1978 SC 215; AIR 1984 SC 326; W.A. No. 72/2004 DD 28-2-05; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; 1996 (1) Mys. L.J 162; 1968 (2) Mys. L.J 48 ; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 2004(6) SCC 465.

       Followed: AIR 1991 SC 101; AIR 1966 SC 187; AIR 1993 SC 1804; 1993 (3) SCC 441; 1993 Suppl (2) SCC 565; 1990 (3) SCC 130; 1998 (4) SCC 626; 1998 (7) SCC 26; 1997 (5) SCC 201; 1997 (6) SCC 283; 1995 (4) SCC 469; 1995 SCC 762; 1994 (5) SCC 282; 1996 (3) SCC 75; AIR 1995 SC 966; 1990 (1) SCC 109; AIR 1979 SC 193; AIR 1953 SC 10 ; AIR 1966 SC 1987; AIR 1989 SC 38; AIR 1990 SC 1927 ; AIR 2003 SC 3057; AIR 1991 SC page 101; AIR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1999 Kar 2513; ILR 1994 Kar 992; AIR 1980 SC 2181; 2002 (7) SCC 564; 2000 (7) SCC 425; 2000 (8) SCC 462; 2002 (1) SCC 227; 2002 (7) SCC 564; AIR 1979 SC 49; AIR 1999 SC 1281; AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1963 SC 151; 33 ; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 1984 (4) SCC 612; AIR 1993 SC 1804; JT 2003 (5) SCC 509; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1975 SC 2016; AIR 1975 SC 2226; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1980 C 319; AIR 1954 SC 92; AIR 1952 SC 252; AIR 1951 SC 41; AIR 1995 SC 141; AIR 1953 SC 375 ; ILR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1964 SC 1284; AIR 1976 SC Page 1031; 1959 Supp (2) SCR 270: AIR 1959 SC 749; 1972 (3) SCR 881: AIR 1972 SC 1738; AIR 1997 SC 434; AIR 1996 SC 1316; AIR 1957 SC 297; AIR 1979 SC Page 898; AIR 1976 SC 2095; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1952 SC 75; AIR 1979 SC 478; AIR 1993 SC 477; AIR 1961 SC 343; AIR 1973 P&H 358; AIR 1971 Assam and Nagaland 1968; 1981(1) SCC 166; AIR 1986 SC 468; 1990 (1) SCC 520; 1996 (2) SCC 549; 1997 (1) SCC 134; AIR 1997 SC 1104; AIR 1997 SC 2167; AIR 1997 SC 2745; AIR 1995 SC 142; AIR 1986 SC Page 180; AIR 1963 SC 1890; AIR 1986 SC 180; AIR 1978 SC 597; 20 LR 779 (DB); AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1967 SC 1239; AIR 1999 SC 826; AIR 1975 SC 1787; AIR 1982 SC 33; AIR SCW 5751; AIR 1973 SC 689; AIR 1964 SC; AIR 1995 SC 2244.

       CONSTITUTION OF INDIA - Constitution Of India - Effect on Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1975 - Article 243-ZF - Effect on Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1975 - Effect of Constitution - Section 2(C) of the Act is in conflict of Part IX of Constitution - Not repealed - After Constitution (74th Amendment) Act, 1992, by force of law the provision is no more in existence in the State. [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: In view of Article 243-ZF of the Constitution, the definition of Bangalore Metropolitan Area" in Section 2(c) of BDA Act being inconsistent with the provisions of Part IX-A of the Constitution, it was in force for a period of one year only from the commencement of Constitution (Seventy-fourth Amendment Act. 1992 and thereafter it is no more in the statute. The reason is, the definition in BDA Act was neither amended nor repealed. Thus, the definition of "Bangalore Metropolitan Area" in Section 2(c) of the BDA Act, by operation of law, automatically stood repealed after the expiry of one year from the commencement of Constitution 74th Amendment. Therefore, the definition in Section 2(c) of the BDA Act shall be treated as no more in the BDA Act. In view of this also, "Metropolitan Area" shall be the area specified by the Governor by public notification under Clause (c) of Article 243-P of the Constitution and not as defined in Section 2(c) of the BDA Act, which is no more in the statute by virtue of the aforementioned Article of the Constitution.

       Cases Referred: ILR 2005 Kar 608; AIR 2002 SC 1574; AIR 1976 SC 2517; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1995 SC 142; 1981 (2) SCC 308; AIR 1963 SC 151; AIR 1955 Mad 610; 1962 Mys. L.J 409; AIR 1960 SC 1788; AIR 1969 SC 634; AIR 1972 SC 2683; AIR 1975 SC 394; 1978 (2) SCC 1; AIR 1978 SC 215; AIR 1984 SC 326; W.A. No. 72/2004 DD 28-2-05; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; 1996 (1) Mys. L.J 162; 1968 (2) Mys. L.J 48 ; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 2004(6) SCC 465.

       Followed: AIR 1991 SC 101; AIR 1966 SC 187; AIR 1993 SC 1804; 1993 (3) SCC 441; 1993 Suppl (2) SCC 565; 1990 (3) SCC 130; 1998 (4) SCC 626; 1998 (7) SCC 26; 1997 (5) SCC 201; 1997 (6) SCC 283; 1995 (4) SCC 469; 1995 SCC 762; 1994 (5) SCC 282; 1996 (3) SCC 75; AIR 1995 SC 966; 1990 (1) SCC 109; AIR 1979 SC 193; AIR 1953 SC 10 ; AIR 1966 SC 1987; AIR 1989 SC 38; AIR 1990 SC 1927 ; AIR 2003 SC 3057; AIR 1991 SC page 101; AIR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1999 Kar 2513; ILR 1994 Kar 992; AIR 1980 SC 2181; 2002 (7) SCC 564; 2000 (7) SCC 425; 2000 (8) SCC 462; 2002 (1) SCC 227; 2002 (7) SCC 564; AIR 1979 SC 49; AIR 1999 SC 1281; AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1963 SC 151; 33 ; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 1984 (4) SCC 612; AIR 1993 SC 1804; JT 2003 (5) SCC 509; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1975 SC 2016; AIR 1975 SC 2226; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1980 C 319; AIR 1954 SC 92; AIR 1952 SC 252; AIR 1951 SC 41; AIR 1995 SC 141; AIR 1953 SC 375 ; ILR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1964 SC 1284; AIR 1976 SC Page 1031; 1959 Supp (2) SCR 270: AIR 1959 SC 749; 1972 (3) SCR 881: AIR 1972 SC 1738; AIR 1997 SC 434; AIR 1996 SC 1316; AIR 1957 SC 297; AIR 1979 SC Page 898; AIR 1976 SC 2095; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1952 SC 75; AIR 1979 SC 478; AIR 1993 SC 477; AIR 1961 SC 343; AIR 1973 P&H 358; AIR 1971 Assam and Nagaland 1968; 1981(1) SCC 166; AIR 1986 SC 468; 1990 (1) SCC 520; 1996 (2) SCC 549; 1997 (1) SCC 134; AIR 1997 SC 1104; AIR 1997 SC 2167; AIR 1997 SC 2745; AIR 1995 SC 142; AIR 1986 SC Page 180; AIR 1963 SC 1890; AIR 1986 SC 180; AIR 1978 SC 597; 20 LR 779 (DB); AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1967 SC 1239; AIR 1999 SC 826; AIR 1975 SC 1787; AIR 1982 SC 33; AIR SCW 5751; AIR 1973 SC 689; AIR 1964 SC; AIR 1995 SC 2244.

       Constitution of India - Executive Order - Article 162 - Executive Order - Effect - Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Special enactment assented to by President - Hence, in matters relating to acquisition of land, executive orders cannot have precedence. [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: L.A. Act being a special enactment exclusively enacted under entry 42 of List II of Seventh Schedule of the Constitution with the Assent of the president, for matters relating to acquisition of lands, the executive orders passed by the State Government cannot have preference. Such executive orders relatable to Article 162 of the Constitution contrary to the special enactments cannot have the effect of over-riding the special enactment. The executive order of the State shall not have statutory force when the field is occupied by enactment.

       Cases Referred: ILR 2005 Kar 608; AIR 2002 SC 1574; AIR 1976 SC 2517; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1995 SC 142; 1981 (2) SCC 308; AIR 1963 SC 151; AIR 1955 Mad 610; 1962 Mys. L.J 409; AIR 1960 SC 1788; AIR 1969 SC 634; AIR 1972 SC 2683; AIR 1975 SC 394; 1978 (2) SCC 1; AIR 1978 SC 215; AIR 1984 SC 326; W.A. No. 72/2004 DD 28-2-05; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; 1996 (1) Mys. L.J 162; 1968 (2) Mys. L.J 48 ; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 2004(6) SCC 465.

       Followed: AIR 1991 SC 101; AIR 1966 SC 187; AIR 1993 SC 1804; 1993 (3) SCC 441; 1993 Suppl (2) SCC 565; 1990 (3) SCC 130; 1998 (4) SCC 626; 1998 (7) SCC 26; 1997 (5) SCC 201; 1997 (6) SCC 283; 1995 (4) SCC 469; 1995 SCC 762; 1994 (5) SCC 282; 1996 (3) SCC 75; AIR 1995 SC 966; 1990 (1) SCC 109; AIR 1979 SC 193; AIR 1953 SC 10 ; AIR 1966 SC 1987; AIR 1989 SC 38; AIR 1990 SC 1927 ; AIR 2003 SC 3057; AIR 1991 SC page 101; AIR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1999 Kar 2513; ILR 1994 Kar 992; AIR 1980 SC 2181; 2002 (7) SCC 564; 2000 (7) SCC 425; 2000 (8) SCC 462; 2002 (1) SCC 227; 2002 (7) SCC 564; AIR 1979 SC 49; AIR 1999 SC 1281; AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1963 SC 151; 33 ; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 1984 (4) SCC 612; AIR 1993 SC 1804; JT 2003 (5) SCC 509; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1975 SC 2016; AIR 1975 SC 2226; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1980 C 319; AIR 1954 SC 92; AIR 1952 SC 252; AIR 1951 SC 41; AIR 1995 SC 141; AIR 1953 SC 375 ; ILR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1964 SC 1284; AIR 1976 SC Page 1031; 1959 Supp (2) SCR 270: AIR 1959 SC 749; 1972 (3) SCR 881: AIR 1972 SC 1738; AIR 1997 SC 434; AIR 1996 SC 1316; AIR 1957 SC 297; AIR 1979 SC Page 898; AIR 1976 SC 2095; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1952 SC 75; AIR 1979 SC 478; AIR 1993 SC 477; AIR 1961 SC 343; AIR 1973 P&H 358; AIR 1971 Assam and Nagaland 1968; 1981(1) SCC 166; AIR 1986 SC 468; 1990 (1) SCC 520; 1996 (2) SCC 549; 1997 (1) SCC 134; AIR 1997 SC 1104; AIR 1997 SC 2167; AIR 1997 SC 2745; AIR 1995 SC 142; AIR 1986 SC Page 180; AIR 1963 SC 1890; AIR 1986 SC 180; AIR 1978 SC 597; 20 LR 779 (DB); AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1967 SC 1239; AIR 1999 SC 826; AIR 1975 SC 1787; AIR 1982 SC 33; AIR SCW 5751; AIR 1973 SC 689; AIR 1964 SC; AIR 1995 SC 2244.

       Constitution of India - Right to livelihood - Article 19 - Right to livelihood - Acquisition of land in large extents by Bangalore Development Authority -Proper Procedure not followed - Plight of owners - Cannot be ignored considering the time that would be taken for payment of compensation - Owners lose their residence, occupation, livelihood and education of their children - Mere payment of compensation would not serve the purpose. [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: By acquiring of such vast extent of lands, the occupation and the right to reside will be deprived and the land owners are deprived of the Constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. The acquisition of vast extent of lands also violative of Article 38 of the Constitution of India. Allotting site under the special scheme will not come to their livelihood nor payment of compensation will salve their problems. The long duration that will take far payment of compensation amount far the acquired lands also cannot be ignored. Until compensation is paid and alternative arrangements far residence profession, studies and other basic requirements are made, one can imagine the plight of the owners standing empty hands an the streets.

       Cases Referred: ILR 2005 Kar 608; AIR 2002 SC 1574; AIR 1976 SC 2517; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1995 SC 142; 1981 (2) SCC 308; AIR 1963 SC 151; AIR 1955 Mad 610; 1962 Mys. L.J 409; AIR 1960 SC 1788; AIR 1969 SC 634; AIR 1972 SC 2683; AIR 1975 SC 394; 1978 (2) SCC 1; AIR 1978 SC 215; AIR 1984 SC 326; W.A. No. 72/2004 DD 28-2-05; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; 1996 (1) Mys. L.J 162; 1968 (2) Mys. L.J 48 ; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 2004(6) SCC 465.

       Followed: AIR 1991 SC 101; AIR 1966 SC 187; AIR 1993 SC 1804; 1993 (3) SCC 441; 1993 Suppl (2) SCC 565; 1990 (3) SCC 130; 1998 (4) SCC 626; 1998 (7) SCC 26; 1997 (5) SCC 201; 1997 (6) SCC 283; 1995 (4) SCC 469; 1995 SCC 762; 1994 (5) SCC 282; 1996 (3) SCC 75; AIR 1995 SC 966; 1990 (1) SCC 109; AIR 1979 SC 193; AIR 1953 SC 10 ; AIR 1966 SC 1987; AIR 1989 SC 38; AIR 1990 SC 1927 ; AIR 2003 SC 3057; AIR 1991 SC page 101; AIR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1999 Kar 2513; ILR 1994 Kar 992; AIR 1980 SC 2181; 2002 (7) SCC 564; 2000 (7) SCC 425; 2000 (8) SCC 462; 2002 (1) SCC 227; 2002 (7) SCC 564; AIR 1979 SC 49; AIR 1999 SC 1281; AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1963 SC 151; 33 ; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 1984 (4) SCC 612; AIR 1993 SC 1804; JT 2003 (5) SCC 509; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1975 SC 2016; AIR 1975 SC 2226; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1980 C 319; AIR 1954 SC 92; AIR 1952 SC 252; AIR 1951 SC 41; AIR 1995 SC 141; AIR 1953 SC 375 ; ILR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1964 SC 1284; AIR 1976 SC Page 1031; 1959 Supp (2) SCR 270: AIR 1959 SC 749; 1972 (3) SCR 881: AIR 1972 SC 1738; AIR 1997 SC 434; AIR 1996 SC 1316; AIR 1957 SC 297; AIR 1979 SC Page 898; AIR 1976 SC 2095; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1952 SC 75; AIR 1979 SC 478; AIR 1993 SC 477; AIR 1961 SC 343; AIR 1973 P&H 358; AIR 1971 Assam and Nagaland 1968; 1981(1) SCC 166; AIR 1986 SC 468; 1990 (1) SCC 520; 1996 (2) SCC 549; 1997 (1) SCC 134; AIR 1997 SC 1104; AIR 1997 SC 2167; AIR 1997 SC 2745; AIR 1995 SC 142; AIR 1986 SC Page 180; AIR 1963 SC 1890; AIR 1986 SC 180; AIR 1978 SC 597; 20 LR 779 (DB); AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1967 SC 1239; AIR 1999 SC 826; AIR 1975 SC 1787; AIR 1982 SC 33; AIR SCW 5751; AIR 1973 SC 689; AIR 1964 SC; AIR 1995 SC 2244

       Constitution Of India - Specification of Metropolitan Area - Article 243-P (C) - Specification of Metropolitan Area - Governor to specify by a Public Notification. [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: As per Explanation to Section 503-B of KMC Act, "Bangalore Metropolitan Area" is the area specified by the Governor under clause (c) of Article 243-P of the Constitution. As per Clause (c) of Article 243-P of the Constitution, the metropolitan area shall be specified by the Governor by public notification. The Governor has to specify the Metropolitan Area on the advice of the Counsel Ministers as provided under Article 163 of the Constitution. Article 243-ZE of the Constitution stipulates constitution of Metropolitan Planning Committee to prepare a draft development plan for the Metropolitan Area as a whole. The Legislature of concerned State shall, by law, make provision for composition of the said Committee. In this regard, Section 503-B of KMC Act stipulated that the Government shall constitute Metropolitan Planning Committee for the Bangalore Metropolitan Area. As per the Explanation of this provision, "Bangalore Metropolitan Area" means the area specified by the Governor under Clause (c) of Article 243-P of the Constitution, which is already extracted.

       Cases Referred:ILR 2005 Kar 608; AIR 2002 SC 1574; AIR 1976 SC 2517; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1995 SC 142; 1981 (2) SCC 308; AIR 1963 SC 151; AIR 1955 Mad 610; 1962 Mys. L.J 409; AIR 1960 SC 1788; AIR 1969 SC 634; AIR 1972 SC 2683; AIR 1975 SC 394; 1978 (2) SCC 1; AIR 1978 SC 215; AIR 1984 SC 326; W.A. No. 72/2004 DD 28-2-05; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; 1996 (1) Mys. L.J 162; 1968 (2) Mys. L.J 48 ; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 2004(6) SCC 465.

       Followed: AIR 1991 SC 101; AIR 1966 SC 187; AIR 1993 SC 1804; 1993 (3) SCC 441; 1993 Suppl (2) SCC 565; 1990 (3) SCC 130; 1998 (4) SCC 626; 1998 (7) SCC 26; 1997 (5) SCC 201; 1997 (6) SCC 283; 1995 (4) SCC 469; 1995 SCC 762; 1994 (5) SCC 282; 1996 (3) SCC 75; AIR 1995 SC 966; 1990 (1) SCC 109; AIR 1979 SC 193; AIR 1953 SC 10 ; AIR 1966 SC 1987; AIR 1989 SC 38; AIR 1990 SC 1927 ; AIR 2003 SC 3057; AIR 1991 SC page 101; AIR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1999 Kar 2513; ILR 1994 Kar 992; AIR 1980 SC 2181; 2002 (7) SCC 564; 2000 (7) SCC 425; 2000 (8) SCC 462; 2002 (1) SCC 227; 2002 (7) SCC 564; AIR 1979 SC 49; AIR 1999 SC 1281; AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1963 SC 151; 33 ; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 1984 (4) SCC 612; AIR 1993 SC 1804; JT 2003 (5) SCC 509; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1975 SC 2016; AIR 1975 SC 2226; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1980 C 319; AIR 1954 SC 92; AIR 1952 SC 252; AIR 1951 SC 41; AIR 1995 SC 141; AIR 1953 SC 375 ; ILR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1964 SC 1284; AIR 1976 SC Page 1031; 1959 Supp (2) SCR 270: AIR 1959 SC 749; 1972 (3) SCR 881: AIR 1972 SC 1738; AIR 1997 SC 434; AIR 1996 SC 1316; AIR 1957 SC 297; AIR 1979 SC Page 898; AIR 1976 SC 2095; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1952 SC 75; AIR 1979 SC 478; AIR 1993 SC 477; AIR 1961 SC 343; AIR 1973 P&H 358; AIR 1971 Assam and Nagaland 1968; 1981(1) SCC 166; AIR 1986 SC 468; 1990 (1) SCC 520; 1996 (2) SCC 549; 1997 (1) SCC 134; AIR 1997 SC 1104; AIR 1997 SC 2167; AIR 1997 SC 2745; AIR 1995 SC 142; AIR 1986 SC Page 180; AIR 1963 SC 1890; AIR 1986 SC 180; AIR 1978 SC 597; 20 LR 779 (DB); AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1967 SC 1239; AIR 1999 SC 826; AIR 1975 SC 1787; AIR 1982 SC 33; AIR SCW 5751; AIR 1973 SC 689; AIR 1964 SC; AIR 1995 SC 2244.

       Constitution Of India - Specification of Metropolitan Area - Article 163 - Specification of Metropolitan Area - Governor to specify by a Public Notification. See, Constitution of India -Article 243-P(c).

       Cases Referred:ILR 2005 Kar 608; AIR 2002 SC 1574; AIR 1976 SC 2517; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1995 SC 142; 1981 (2) SCC 308; AIR 1963 SC 151; AIR 1955 Mad 610; 1962 Mys. L.J 409; AIR 1960 SC 1788; AIR 1969 SC 634; AIR 1972 SC 2683; AIR 1975 SC 394; 1978 (2) SCC 1; AIR 1978 SC 215; AIR 1984 SC 326; W.A. No. 72/2004 DD 28-2-05; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; 1996 (1) Mys. L.J 162; 1968 (2) Mys. L.J 48 ; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 2004(6) SCC 465.

       Followed: AIR 1991 SC 101; AIR 1966 SC 187; AIR 1993 SC 1804; 1993 (3) SCC 441; 1993 Suppl (2) SCC 565; 1990 (3) SCC 130; 1998 (4) SCC 626; 1998 (7) SCC 26; 1997 (5) SCC 201; 1997 (6) SCC 283; 1995 (4) SCC 469; 1995 SCC 762; 1994 (5) SCC 282; 1996 (3) SCC 75; AIR 1995 SC 966; 1990 (1) SCC 109; AIR 1979 SC 193; AIR 1953 SC 10 ; AIR 1966 SC 1987; AIR 1989 SC 38; AIR 1990 SC 1927 ; AIR 2003 SC 3057; AIR 1991 SC page 101; AIR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1999 Kar 2513; ILR 1994 Kar 992; AIR 1980 SC 2181; 2002 (7) SCC 564; 2000 (7) SCC 425; 2000 (8) SCC 462; 2002 (1) SCC 227; 2002 (7) SCC 564; AIR 1979 SC 49; AIR 1999 SC 1281; AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1963 SC 151; 33 ; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 1984 (4) SCC 612; AIR 1993 SC 1804; JT 2003 (5) SCC 509; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1975 SC 2016; AIR 1975 SC 2226; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1980 C 319; AIR 1954 SC 92; AIR 1952 SC 252; AIR 1951 SC 41; AIR 1995 SC 141; AIR 1953 SC 375 ; ILR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1964 SC 1284; AIR 1976 SC Page 1031; 1959 Supp (2) SCR 270: AIR 1959 SC 749; 1972 (3) SCR 881: AIR 1972 SC 1738; AIR 1997 SC 434; AIR 1996 SC 1316; AIR 1957 SC 297; AIR 1979 SC Page 898; AIR 1976 SC 2095; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1952 SC 75; AIR 1979 SC 478; AIR 1993 SC 477; AIR 1961 SC 343; AIR 1973 P&H 358; AIR 1971 Assam and Nagaland 1968; 1981(1) SCC 166; AIR 1986 SC 468; 1990 (1) SCC 520; 1996 (2) SCC 549; 1997 (1) SCC 134; AIR 1997 SC 1104; AIR 1997 SC 2167; AIR 1997 SC 2745; AIR 1995 SC 142; AIR 1986 SC Page 180; AIR 1963 SC 1890; AIR 1986 SC 180; AIR 1978 SC 597; 20 LR 779 (DB); AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1967 SC 1239; AIR 1999 SC 826; AIR 1975 SC 1787; AIR 1982 SC 33; AIR SCW 5751; AIR 1973 SC 689; AIR 1964 SC; AIR 1995 SC 2244.

       Constitution Of India -Equal protection of laws -Article 14 - Equal protection of laws - Land acquired by Bangalore Development Authority - For public purpose - Provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to be applied to extend equal protection of laws, to avoid discrimination - Words as for as applicable does not mean non-application of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: The L.A. Act impose certain obligations upon the acquiring body and confer certain rights upon the land owners. Mandatory procedure is laid down in L.A. Act. Such things are not provided in the other enactments. To have uniformity in the matter of acquisition and for solution to all matters, provisions of L.A. Act shall be applicable. In order to eliminate discrimination, Article 14 of the Constitution shall be complied with.

       Cases Referred: ILR 2005 Kar 608; AIR 2002 SC 1574; AIR 1976 SC 2517; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1995 SC 142; 1981 (2) SCC 308; AIR 1963 SC 151; AIR 1955 Mad 610; 1962 Mys. L.J 409; AIR 1960 SC 1788; AIR 1969 SC 634; AIR 1972 SC 2683; AIR 1975 SC 394; 1978 (2) SCC 1; AIR 1978 SC 215; AIR 1984 SC 326; W.A. No. 72/2004 DD 28-2-05; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; 1996 (1) Mys. L.J 162; 1968 (2) Mys. L.J 48 ; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 2004(6) SCC 465.

       Followed: AIR 1991 SC 101; AIR 1966 SC 187; AIR 1993 SC 1804; 1993 (3) SCC 441; 1993 Suppl (2) SCC 565; 1990 (3) SCC 130; 1998 (4) SCC 626; 1998 (7) SCC 26; 1997 (5) SCC 201; 1997 (6) SCC 283; 1995 (4) SCC 469; 1995 SCC 762; 1994 (5) SCC 282; 1996 (3) SCC 75; AIR 1995 SC 966; 1990 (1) SCC 109; AIR 1979 SC 193; AIR 1953 SC 10 ; AIR 1966 SC 1987; AIR 1989 SC 38; AIR 1990 SC 1927 ; AIR 2003 SC 3057; AIR 1991 SC page 101; AIR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1999 Kar 2513; ILR 1994 Kar 992; AIR 1980 SC 2181; 2002 (7) SCC 564; 2000 (7) SCC 425; 2000 (8) SCC 462; 2002 (1) SCC 227; 2002 (7) SCC 564; AIR 1979 SC 49; AIR 1999 SC 1281; AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1963 SC 151; 33 ; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 1984 (4) SCC 612; AIR 1993 SC 1804; JT 2003 (5) SCC 509; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1975 SC 2016; AIR 1975 SC 2226; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1980 C 319; AIR 1954 SC 92; AIR 1952 SC 252; AIR 1951 SC 41; AIR 1995 SC 141; AIR 1953 SC 375 ; ILR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1964 SC 1284; AIR 1976 SC Page 1031; 1959 Supp (2) SCR 270: AIR 1959 SC 749; 1972 (3) SCR 881: AIR 1972 SC 1738; AIR 1997 SC 434; AIR 1996 SC 1316; AIR 1957 SC 297; AIR 1979 SC Page 898; AIR 1976 SC 2095; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1952 SC 75; AIR 1979 SC 478; AIR 1993 SC 477; AIR 1961 SC 343; AIR 1973 P&H 358; AIR 1971 Assam and Nagaland 1968; 1981(1) SCC 166; AIR 1986 SC 468; 1990 (1) SCC 520; 1996 (2) SCC 549; 1997 (1) SCC 134; AIR 1997 SC 1104; AIR 1997 SC 2167; AIR 1997 SC 2745; AIR 1995 SC 142; AIR 1986 SC Page 180; AIR 1963 SC 1890; AIR 1986 SC 180; AIR 1978 SC 597; 20 LR 779 (DB); AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1967 SC 1239; AIR 1999 SC 826; AIR 1975 SC 1787; AIR 1982 SC 33; AIR SCW 5751; AIR 1973 SC 689; AIR 1964 SC; AIR 1995 SC 2244.

       Discrimination

       CONSTITUTION OF INDIA - Article 14 -Discrimination -Proposal for acquisition of land - Certain lands deleted - Adjacent or contiguous lands not proposed - No valid reasons assigned by authority - Proposal hit by Article 14.

       [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: The KIADB has proposed to acquire these lands for the said purpose. Strangely, the BDA has not proposed to acquire the lands marked in Yellow colour and the lands marked in Green colour have been excluded in the final notification. This is in respect of one batch of writ petitions. Similar facts are pleaded in several other writ petitions furnishing the survey numbers of contiguous lands. It is also stated that some of the properties of the petitioners are developed but despite such development they have been acquired indiscriminately. It is alleged that BDA has not acquired the adjacent lands or lands contiguous and the acquisition proposed have been deleted in respect of some other lands without any valid reason which is illegal. Therefore, acquisition of the lands in question and non-acquisition or deletion from acquisition of some other lands situated in the same vicinity or area, amounts to discrimination and the same is arbitrary.

       Cases Referred: ILR 2005 Kar 608; AIR 2002 SC 1574; AIR 1976 SC 2517; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1995 SC 142; 1981 (2) SCC 308; AIR 1963 SC 151; AIR 1955 Mad 610; 1962 Mys. L.J 409; AIR 1960 SC 1788; AIR 1969 SC 634; AIR 1972 SC 2683; AIR 1975 SC 394; 1978 (2) SCC 1; AIR 1978 SC 215; AIR 1984 SC 326; W.A. No. 72/2004 DD 28-2-05; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; 1996 (1) Mys. L.J 162; 1968 (2) Mys. L.J 48 ; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 2004(6) SCC 465.

       Followed: AIR 1991 SC 101; AIR 1966 SC 187; AIR 1993 SC 1804; 1993 (3) SCC 441; 1993 Suppl (2) SCC 565; 1990 (3) SCC 130; 1998 (4) SCC 626; 1998 (7) SCC 26; 1997 (5) SCC 201; 1997 (6) SCC 283; 1995 (4) SCC 469; 1995 SCC 762; 1994 (5) SCC 282; 1996 (3) SCC 75; AIR 1995 SC 966; 1990 (1) SCC 109; AIR 1979 SC 193; AIR 1953 SC 10 ; AIR 1966 SC 1987; AIR 1989 SC 38; AIR 1990 SC 1927 ; AIR 2003 SC 3057; AIR 1991 SC page 101; AIR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1999 Kar 2513; ILR 1994 Kar 992; AIR 1980 SC 2181; 2002 (7) SCC 564; 2000 (7) SCC 425; 2000 (8) SCC 462; 2002 (1) SCC 227; 2002 (7) SCC 564; AIR 1979 SC 49; AIR 1999 SC 1281; AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1963 SC 151; 33 ; ILR 1993 Kar 1791; 1984 (4) SCC 612; AIR 1993 SC 1804; JT 2003 (5) SCC 509; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1975 SC 2016; AIR 1975 SC 2226; ILR 1998 Kar 4172; AIR 1972 SC 591; AIR 1980 C 319; AIR 1954 SC 92; AIR 1952 SC 252; AIR 1951 SC 41; AIR 1995 SC 141; AIR 1953 SC 375 ; ILR 1959 SC 648; ILR 1964 SC 1284; AIR 1976 SC Page 1031; 1959 Supp (2) SCR 270: AIR 1959 SC 749; 1972 (3) SCR 881: AIR 1972 SC 1738; AIR 1997 SC 434; AIR 1996 SC 1316; AIR 1957 SC 297; AIR 1979 SC Page 898; AIR 1976 SC 2095; AIR 1976 SC 2403; AIR 1952 SC 75; AIR 1979 SC 478; AIR 1993 SC 477; AIR 1961 SC 343; AIR 1973 P&H 358; AIR 1971 Assam and Nagaland 1968; 1981(1) SCC 166; AIR 1986 SC 468; 1990 (1) SCC 520; 1996 (2) SCC 549; 1997 (1) SCC 134; AIR 1997 SC 1104; AIR 1997 SC 2167; AIR 1997 SC 2745; AIR 1995 SC 142; AIR 1986 SC Page 180; AIR 1963 SC 1890; AIR 1986 SC 180; AIR 1978 SC 597; 20 LR 779 (DB); AIR 1976 SC 437; AIR 1967 SC 1239; AIR 1999 SC 826; AIR 1975 SC 1787; AIR 1982 SC 33; AIR SCW 5751; AIR 1973 SC 689; AIR 1964 SC; AIR 1995 SC 2244.