NANJUNDAIAH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE only question involved herein is as to whether during the period 24-9-1984 and 27-11-1991, the Deputy Commissioners had the competence to issue notifications under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition act, 1894 (in short the 'principal Act') as amended and extended to the state of Karnataka by the Land Acquisition (Karnataka Extension and amendment) Act, 1961 (in short the 'state Amending Act')?

(2.) THE appellants are the owners of land bearing Sy. No. 565/4 of mallavalli Village, measuring one acre six guntas. The respondent-Deputy Commissioner, published a notification in the Karnataka Gazette, dated 15-3-1993 proposing to acquire the said land for public purpose, namely for construction of a primary school. The appellants questioned the competence of the Deputy Commissioner to issue notification in view of the amendment to the Central Act as effected by the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 made by the Parliament. This amending Act, came into force on 24-9-1984. The contention of the appellants before the learned Single Judge was that because of the Central Amending Act of 1984 made by the Parliament to the principal Act, the Deputy Commissioner had lost his competence to issue notification under Section 4 and therefore, the impugned notification should be quashed. The submissions raised on behalf of the appellants could not find favour with the learned Single Judge and therefore the writ petition came to be dismissed. Now, the very same question has been raised before us in this intra-Court appeal.

(3.) BEFORE dealing with the submissions advanced by Sri Mohandas N. Hegde, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants, we would like to refer to Section 4 of the principal Act as it stood from time to time with successive amendments incorporated therein by the State as well as central Amending Acts and the relevant constitutional parameters. CONSTITUTIONAL PARAMETERS