RAMAIAH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH the matter is posted for orders, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the main matter itself is taken up for disposal.

(2.) WRIT petitioners are persons who claim to be legal heirs of one Muniramaiah who is rip more and who all claim to be residents of Vayasandra Village, Kasaba Hobli, Hoskote Taluk, Bangalore Rural District.

(3.) THE Assistant Commissioner though had set aside the alienation in favour of respondents 3 and 4 and had directed restoration of the land in favour of the petitioners, respondents 3 and 4 having preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner and even when matters were pending before the Authorities under the Act and inspite of such developments having been brought to the notice of the second respondent - special land acquisition officer -KIADB, the second respondent has nevertheless disbursed the amount of compensation payable to the land owners of the subject land which had come to be acquired for the purpose of formation of an industrial layout, at the behest of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board and on the basis of the notifications issued by the first respondent - State of Karnataka; that the distribution of the compensation amount payable to the owners in lieu of the acquisition of the subject land in favour of respondents 3 and 4 by the second respondent is an illegal act; that the writ petitioners have been left high and dry; that the action on the part of the second respondent in disbursing the amount in favour of respondents 3 and 4 even when their name did not figure in the revenue records on and after the proceedings before the Assistant Commissioner under the Act and in this background, have approached this Court seeking for the following reliefs: