K. V. SRINIVAS RAO Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short grievance of the Petitioners regardless of the lengthy pleadings & prayer is as to land forcibly being taken away by the Authorities for the expansion of the road in question even when they are not agreeable thereto.

(2.) Learned counsel for the Petitioners argues that the Right to Property though not a Fundamental Right is constitutionally guaranteed under Article 300A; his clients cannot be compelled to give up their property except in accordance with law; his clients are not agreeable for relinquishing their property and therefore, if at all the State wants these properties, the acquisition process under 2013 Act is the only course open. He argues that his clients' ownership & possession should be protected from interference of the Respondents save with the authority of law.

(3.) Learned AGA appearing for the State and the learned Panel Counsel appearing for the Respondent - Authority together submit that some of land owners have agreed and accordingly given up their lands by executing Relinquishment Deeds and therefore, this course is open to the Petitioners as well wherein the compensation payable would be three times the Guideline value keeping in view the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. So contending, they both seek dismissal of these Writ Petitions.