GOPIREDDY HANAMAPPA SANGAVANAVAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Subramanya Jois, Learned Senior Counsel along with Smt. Sunitha P. Kalasoor, appearing for the petitioners, Sri Basavaraj Sabarad, Learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 3 and Sri Maldar, Learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Perused the records made available by Learned Counsel appearing for the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (for short 'the Board').

(2.) PETITIONERS are seeking for a direction to the respondents to denotify the lands mentioned in Annexures -A and B insofar the same relates to the petitioners by declaring that the professed and purported acquisition of lands notified has stood frustrated by efflux of time.

(3.) UNDISPUTEDLY , petitioners did not challenge the acquisition proceedings. Their claim in the present writ petitions is that they are illiterate, vulnerable villagers and they were lured by respondents to consent for acquisition and with an earnest belief that their villages would be industrially developed and their children and wards would be extended employment they were of the view that it would enable them to eke out their livelihood which would be as a measure of rehabilitation and as such they categorically and unequivocally admit that they did not seriously oppose the acquisition which had been so proposed by the Board and notified for acquisition. The lands involved in the present writ petition belonging to the respective petitioners are tabulated hereinbelow indicating the name, survey number and extent of land of each of the petitioners Annexure -A.