SANNARANGAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in the present appeal arises out of an order of the High Court of Karnataka by which the provisions of Sec. 15 of the Karnataka Highways Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as "the State Act") have been held to be valid. The challenge in the writ petition was, inter alia, on the ground that prior to resorting to acquisition under Sec. 15 of the State Act no opportunity of hearing was contemplated/afforded to the landowner which necessarily made the aforesaid provision of the State Act constitutionally fragile.

(2.) The High Court answered the said question against the landowner. Aggrieved the present appeal has been filed.

(3.) Reading the order of the High Court we are of the view that the canvas on which the High Court had decided the issue needs to be further unfolded by a fuller consideration of the relevant provisions of the State Act. Reading the provisions contained in Sec. 2(c), Sec. 2(e), Sec. 2(k), Sec. 3, Sec. 7, Sec. 15 and Sec. 17 of the State Act we find that a declaration in the official Gazette declaring any road, way or land to be a highway is to be followed by another Notification under Sec. 7(1)(ii) of the State Act fixing the highway boundary, the building line and the control line as defined under Sec. 2(c) and Sec. 2(e) and Sec. 2(k) of the State Act. Sec. 7(2) of the State Act, which is extracted below, contemplates publication of the notification in question in the official Gazette, to which objections can be filed by a person affected. Such objections may result in abandonment of the proposal or modification thereof under sub-section (4) of Sec. 7.