LAKSHMAMMA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners claiming to be the successors-in-interest of one Mr.L.Narasimhaiah, have filed this petition 17/10/2012 for laying a challenge to the 1985 acquisition of the subject land fairly described in the schedule.

(2.) Learned Sr. Advocate Mr.Shashi Kiran Shetty falters the acquisition arguing that: the land is not required for the purpose for which it is acquired because the earlier proposals for acquisitions have been already dropped and the Respondent-Society itself has said about non-requirement; it is a land granted to Scheduled Caste persons under the provisions of Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 and therefore, cannot be acquired casually; possession continues with the Petitioners till date and therefore, acquisition has lapsed u/s 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013; the 8th Respondent-middlemen namely C.V.L.Shastry was not their land owners attorney and he has not handed the compensation received from the government/society. So arguing, he seeks allowing of the Petition.

(3.) After service of notice, the State and SLAO have entered appearance through the learned AGA; the Respondent-BDA & its officials are represented by their Panel Counsel; the Respondent-Housing Society speaks through its Panel Advocate; the State and the BDA have filed their Statement of Objections opposing the Petition controverting the stand of Petitioners. The Panel Advocate for the Housing Society has filed a Memo offering to pay additional sum of compensation with interest for buying peace. All the advocates make vehement submissions in justification of the acquisition on merits, on enormous delay & latches and non-impleadment of allottees of the sites.