SADASHLVALAH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS in W. P. Nos. 7540/2001 and 9155-9204/2001 and 26275-77/2001 are all owners of lands which are notified for acquisition by the Government for establishment of an industrial area for Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board, the fourth respondent herein. Notification under Section 28 (1) of the Kamataka industrial Area development Act was issued on 15. 4. 1-997 and final notification was issued under Section 28 (4) of the Act on 16. 7. 1997. Thereafter, the possession of the land was taken in pursuance of a notice issued under Section 28 (6) on 17. 7. 1997. Notices under section 9 and 10 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter for short called as "the Act") was issued after holding an enquiry for passing of an award. The compensation was mutually agreed to be paid at the rate of Rs. 6,00,000/- per acre for agricultural lands and rs. 7,00,000/- per acre for converted land. Accordingly, compensation was paid to the petitioners. However, in so far as kharab land is concerned, the Land Acquisition Officer declined to pass any award on the ground that the said kharab land is not assessed to land revenue, there is no provision for payment of compensation and accordingly an endorsement came to be issued as per Annexure -J dated 2. 11. 2000 informing the petitioners that they are not entitled to any compensation for the kharab land. Aggrieved by the said endorsement, the petitioners have preferred these Writ Petitions.

(2.) RESPONDENTS have filed a counter contending that as per themutation register extracts khatha does not stand in the name of the petitioners in respect of 'b' phut kharab lands and Rule 21 (2) (b)of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules states that 'b' phut kharab lands refer to those lands which are reserved for public purpose. Therefore, the petitioners are not the owners of the said lands. The RTC for the year 1995-96 classifies the land in question as 'b' phut kharab land and petitioners have never paid land revenue in respect of the 'b' phut kharab lands. Therefore, they contend that the petitioners are not entitled to compensation for the said kharab land. It is also contended that the payment for compensation in respect of the 'b' phut kharab land cannot be agitated under article 226 of the Constitution of India as the same could be agitated only by way of resorting to the provisions of Section 18 of the Act which provides for objections to the measurement of the land. Therefore, they contend the Writ Petiticns are not maintainable and are liable to be dismissed.

(3.) IN W. P. Nos. 5998-600072002, 18427/2002 and 18231/2002,the petitioners land has been notified for acquisition in the similar fashion. However, the petitioners have been issued with endorsements as per Annexure-J dated 22. 12. 2001 in W. P. Nos. 5998-6000/2002, Annexure-F dated 4. 12. 2001 in W. P. No. 184277 2002 and Annexure-T dated 26. 3. 2002 in W. P. Nos. 18231/2002 informing the petitioners that the grant in favour of the petitioners are not valid. As per the directions issued by the Deputy commissioner enquiry is closed, their title cannot be gone into and therefore they are not the interested persons in the land acquisition; there is no necessity to hold any further enquiry under Sections 9 and 10 of the Act, as such the enquiry is closed.