JAYALAKSHMI VENKATESH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the prayer made in these two writ petitions are common, they were clubbed, heard together and disposed of by this common order.

(2.) The petitioners are seeking to challenge the acquisition of their lands mainly on two grounds. Firstly, it is contended that since the notification under Sec. 11 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 2013' for short) was issued on 18/4/2017, a declaration and summary of rehabilitation and resettlement in terms of Sec. 19(1) of the Act, 2013 was required to be published within a period twelve months from the date of preliminary notification as provided under sub-sec. (7) of Sec. 19 of the Act, 2013 and since the same was published on 3/10/2020, beyond the prescribed period, this court should declare that the impugned notification has rescinded. Secondly, it is contended that the respondents are deviating from the alignment of the water canal as approved by the Chief Engineer in the year 2013 and therefore, the respondents should be directed to construct the canal as per the approved alignment.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that earlier a preliminary notification was issued under the Land Acquisition Act , 1894 on 16/2/2012 notifying the lands of the petitioners for the very same purpose. However, since the alignment changed, the final notification was not issued. Thereafter, after the Act, 2013 came into force, a preliminary notification under Sec. 11(1) of the Act, 2013 was issued on 16/4/2017. Learned counsel contends that respondent-authorities were unduly influenced by vested interests and in order to benefit the neighbouring property owners, deviated the alignment of canal and consequently are trying to form water canal on the properties belonging to the petitioners. In order to support the said contention, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a Court Commissioner may be appointed to verify the said contention of the petitioners. Learned counsel would further submit that, as per the joint measurement conducted by the respondents, the petitioners were informed that only 20 guntas of land would be acquired. However, in the final notification published on 3/10/2020 what is acquired is 22 guntas in Sy.No.19/1+2/A1, 17 guntas in Sy.No.19/1+2/A/A2/A, and 20 guntas in Sy.No.19/1+2/A/2B. Learned counsel submits that it is clear from the actions of the respondents that they have acted under colourable exercise of power and have been deviating from the alignment of the canal which was approved by the Chief Engineer in the year 2013.