M MANIKLAL Vs. STATE OF MYSORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two short legal issues - both apparently devoid of merit - were urged unsuccessfully before the High Court and repeated, with a somewhat similar fate, before us, if we may anticipate our conclusion. A judgment of affirmation may usefully be an abbreviation and so, we shall briefly deal with Shri Gupte's twin submissions on behalf of the appellant writ petitioner. The appeal is by special leave and the subject-matter is land compulsorily acquired under the City of Bangalore Improvement Act, 1945 (for short the Improvement Act) (Mysore Act V of 1945).

(2.) A concise narration of the necessary facts may conveniently be compressed into a paragraph or two. The appellant purchased two portions of S. No. 211 within the District of Bangalore from two persons Giliteppa and Nanjappa during the pendency of land acquisition proceedings under the Improvement Act. These proceedings were for acquisition of land in S. No. 211 for making a lay-out plan for a building colony. This limited objective was completed after due formalities were complied with and thereafter the land was made over to the Housing Board whose statutory responsibility is to implement housing schemes. We are told that houses have been built on the land already although there is some doubt as to whether 5 acres out of the total extent still remain vacant. If the contentions of the appellant are sound the whole scheme will be shot down, a disaster a socially conscious court should try to avert unless compelled by fundamental legal flaws.

(3.) What, then, are the alleged vital weaknesses in the acquisition proceedings which vitiate them altogether Firstly, a technicality technically countered, and secondly, a compassionate consideration which has no invalidatory effect.