MUNIYAPPA, S/O. LATE A.H. MUNISHAMAPPA Vs. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AN application filed by the petitioners under Section 1');">18(3)(b)of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the Act), to direct the respondent to make reference under S.1');">18 of the Act with regard to the acquisition of land measuring 1 acre 8 guntas in Sy. No.77 of Avalahalli Village in Uttarahalli Hobli of Bangalore South Taluk, in LAC No.294/91 -92 having been dismissed by the Civil Court, as being not within the period of limitation, this writ petition has been filed. Land bearing Sy. Nos.77 and 78 of Avalahalli Village in Uttarahalli Hobli of Bangalore South Taluk was acquired for the implementation of the scheme -J.P. Nagar IX Stage Layout by the Bangalore Development Authority. Notification under Section 17(1) of the BDA Act, 1976 was issued on 17.11.1988, which was gazetted on 12.01.1989. Government issued final declaration under S.19(1) of the BDA Act on 22.07.1991, which was gazetted on 26.07.1991, An award was passed on 17.05.1999.

(2.) THE petitioners along with others, filed W.P. Nos. 14252 -264/2000, to quash the said Notifications, the Award dated 17.05.1999 and an endorsement of the BDA dated 29.03.2000. Alternatively they sought for a direction to permit them to form layout of sites in the said survey numbers, as per Government Order dated 17.11.1995. The same were dismissed on 27.06.2001, by holding that there was inordinate delay and laches in filing the writ petitions and that S.1');">11 -A of the Act is not applicable and that the land having been vested in the BOA, the petitioners are not entitled to the alternate relief. The said order has become final.

(3.) SRI P. Krishnappa, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that the impugned order being opposed to the record of the case, the reasoning of the learned Civil Judge being illegal, interference in the matter is called for. Learned counsel submitted that the knowledge of the passing of the award can only be with reference to the date of receipt of notices of the award having been passed and not otherwise. Learned counsel submitted that the decision reported at AIR 2005 SCW 5535 has no application to the case. Learned counsel placed reliance on the decisions reported in Raja Harish Chandra Raj Singh Vs. The Deputy Land Acquisition Officer and Another, AIR 1961 SC 1500 ; State of Punjab Vs. Mst. Qaisar Jehan Begum and Another, AIR 1963 SC 1604 ; and an order dated 24.08.2011 passed in W.P. 35258/2009 and connected petitions.