SRI. C.B. NARASIMHAIAH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is before this Court assailing the demand notice dated 25.02.2011 issued by respondent No. 2 for payment of difference cost towards Site No. 1425. The petitioner has also sought for issue of mandamus to execute lease -cum -sale deed in respect of Site No. 1425 since the petitioner has already paid the sital value at Rs. 175/ - per sq.ft. The facts in brief are that certain lands belonging to the petitioner and other persons within the jurisdiction of the City Municipal Council was acquired for the purpose of construction of the Railway Over Bridge in Tumkur. In that regard, insofar as the utilization of the said property, the process of acquisition has been undertaken and the land owners have been compensated. The land owners also had the opportunity of seeking for enhancement of compensation and the petitioner is also stated to have filed an application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.

(2.) NOTWITHSTANDING the compensation which was paid, the City Municipal Council had taken a decision to provide an alternate house site each to the petitioner and such other persons who had lost the lands only as an incentive. While doing so, the City Municipal Council had requested the Tumkur Urban Development Authority (for short the 'TUDA') to allot sites in favour of such land losers. It is in that context, the site bearing No. 1425 measuring 265.90 sq.ft. was allotted in favour of the petitioner and certain other sites were allotted to the other land losers.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner while assailing the communication would contend that the respondents were not justified in that regard. It is the case of the learned counsel that the petitioner is a land looser and such land had been lost by the petitioner in the heart of the city, while the alternate site is being allotted in a different location and therefore, the rate fixed by the TUDA at the first instance at Rs. 175/ - per sq.ft. is justified and the same did not call for enhancement. It is her case that when initial demand of Rs. 5,17,016/ - at the rate of Rs. 175/ - per sq.ft. was made, the entire payment has been made and there was an obligation on the respondents to execute the lease -cum -sale deed and complete the transaction. It is contended by the learned counsel that the present demand made at Rs. 300/ - per sq.ft. is without basis whatsoever. Therefore the action of the respondents is not justified and the communication dated 25.02.2011 should be quashed and a direction be issued to the respondents to execute the lease -cum -sale deed by accepting the amount which has already been paid.