MOHAMMED NAZEER Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a senior citizen of Shivamogga City is before this Court being aggrieved of denial of developed sites at the hands of the respondent-Shivamogga Urban Development Authority in lieu of acquisition of 4 acres 15 guntas of land belonging to the petitioner in Sy.No.64 of Malligenahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Shivamogga Taluk and District. Although a prayer is made in the writ petition to quash the award notice dated 09.03.2010, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is only an alternative prayer and the main prayer is to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authority to release 40% of the scheduled land in terms of the provisions of the relevant Act/Rules governing allotment of compensation for the acquired land.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under similar circumstances in respect of the very same notification, one of the land looser Sri S.A.Vamik Baig has approached this Court in W.P.No.1599/2012 seeking to quash the endorsement issued by the respondent authority declining to allot alternative sites and this Court by order dated 26.02.2013 rejected the prayer made in the writ petition but directed the respondent authority to consider the request/application which was permitted to be made by the petitioner after disposal of the writ petition, for allotment of alternative sites, within a period of two months from the date of the order. Learned counsel draws the attention of this Court to Annexure-G which is a sale deed executed by the respondent authority in favour of Sri S.A.Vamik Baig consequent to the directions issued by this Court. Learned counsel therefore prays that similar orders may be passed in this writ petition.

(3.) Per contra, learned counsel Sri A.V.Gangadharappa, appearing for the respondent authorities submits that the facts and circumstances in the case of S.A.Vamik Baig is totally different from the facts and circumstances of the present case. The learned counsel submits that the petitioner has approached this Court after lapse of more than seven years after the impugned endorsement was issued by the authority and therefore on the ground of delay and laches the writ petition is required to be dismissed. Secondly it is submitted that the petitioner has concealed certain relevant material including the fact that there was a dispute raised by some third parties claiming title over the property in question. Initially O.S.no.284/1999 was filed by one Sri Noor Jahan Begum and Smt.Shahed Begum in the court of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) Shivamogga seeking partition and separate possession of their 1/12th share in Sy.No.64. The said plaintiffs had also brought it to the notice of the respondent authority that there was a dispute pending before the civil court and therefore compensation should not be granted to the petitioner herein. It is submitted that the petitioner has also filed O.S.No.142/2002 before the Civil Court at Shivamogga. Both the suits in O.S.No.284/1999 and O.S.No.142/2002 were heard and disposed of by a common judgment and decree. The suit filed by the petitioner was decreed and the suit filed by Smt. Noor Jahan Begum was dismissed. Consequently Smt. Noor Jahan Begum and another preferred R.A.No.288/2010 and an interim order was granted by the Appellate Court on 19.07.2011. Thereafter, the petitioner made a representation dated 18.11.2010 requesting for payment of compensation in view of the dismissal of the suit. The regular appeals in R.A.Nos.288/2010 and 278/2010 came to be dismissed on 22.06.2017. Nevertheless, the aggrieved appellant has filed RSA No.1542/2017 before this Court and the same is pending consideration. In that view of the matter it is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent authority that this writ petition is also liable to be dismissed on the ground that the petitioner has not approached this Court with clean hands.