COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants-Bangalore Development Authority (for short, 'the BDA'), the State of karnataka, the former Chief Minister Sri S. 'm. Krishna and two others have challenged in this batch of eight writ appeals the order of the learned Single Judge quashing the acquisition proceedings pertaining to "arkavathi LAYOUT" as well as the declaration made to the effect that the BDA has no jurisdiction to frame developmental schemes in Bangalore metropolitan Area and against other reliefs granted in the writ petitions. Some writ petitions have also been filed challenging the acquisition of land for the formation of the "arkavathi layout" on the grounds, which have been upheld by the learned Single Judge, in the impugned judgment under appeal. Since identical questions of law and fact arise for consideration in the writ appeals and the writ petitions they are taken up for consideration together and are being disposed of by this common order. The facts leading to the present proceedings are briefly stated hereunder:

(2.) THE BDA for the purpose of formation of Arkavathi Layout formulated a developmental scheme and issued a notification dated 3-2-2003 under Sub-sections (1) and (3) of Section 17 of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 (for short, "the BDA Act"), which was duly published in the Karnataka Gazette on the very same day. In accordance with Section 36 of the bda Act, the Additional Land Acquisition Officer, BDA, Bangalore, its staff and workmen were authorized to exercise the powers conferred under Section 4 (2) of the Land Acquisition act, 1894 (for short, "the LA Act" ). All persons interested in the land which was notified for acquisition were called upon to file objections within thirty days from the date of publication of the notification to the Land Acquisition Officer, BDA, Bangalore. The notification made it clear that the particulars of the scheme, the map of the area, statements specifying the lands which it proposes to acquire could be seen in the office of the LAO, BDA, during the office hours on all working days. The BDA proposed to acquire 3,339. 12 acres of land situated in Yelahanka, K. R. Puram and Kasaba Hobli in Bangalore North and East Taluk situated in Bangalore District. There was an error in the total acreage sought to be acquired which was corrected by-issuing a corrigendum according to which the total extent of land sought to be acquired was 3,839 acres. Thereafter, individual notices were issued under Section 17 (5) of the BDA Act to the landowners. The substance of the notification was published in the daily newspapers having wide circulation for the information of the public at large. Some of the landowners preferred w. P. Nos. 19g03 to 19621 of 2003 challenging the aforesaid preliminary notification before this court on the ground that the said notification is violative of Article 243-P of the Constitution of india and ultra vires the provisions of Sections 2 (c) and 15 (2) (ii) of the BDA Act. After considering the aforesaid contentions the writ petitions were rejected by order dated 1-7-2003. In the meanwhile several landowners whose lands were sought to be acquired had filed objections/representations, in response to the preliminary notification. Therefore, notices were issued to all those persons to appear for personal hearing. The objections/representations received were duly considered. The BDA in its meeting held on 3-2-2004 in Subject No. 43 of 2004 resolved to implement the Arkavathi Scheme under Section 15 (2) of the BDA Act; to seek approval of the Government under Section 18 (3) of the BDA Act; to accept the objections/representations filed by the interested persons in respect of 518. 12 acres and to withdraw the notification to the said extent; to overrule the objections/representations in respect of 2,658 acres of notified land and to seek the declaration in respect of 2,758 acres of notified land; to grant alternate sites to revenue site holders in terms of the orders passed in W. P. Nos. 20875 to 20938 of 2001, dated 20-7-2001 and to grant sites under the Bangalore Development ' authority (Incentive Scheme for Voluntary Surrender of Land) Rules, 1989. Out of the total extent sought to be acquired an extent of 487. 11 acres belongs to the Government. In respect of 92 acres of land interested persons did not file any objections to the proposed acquisition at all. The BDA accordingly made certain modifications to the scheme. Thereafter, it submitted the modified scheme to the Government for its sanction. The Government after considering the proposal submitted by the BDA accorded sanction under Section 18 (3) of the BDA Act for the scheme by its order dated 21-2-2004. Thereafter, the Government issued the declaration under section 19 (1) of the BDA Act on 23-2-2004 which was also published in the Karnataka Gazette on the same day. The substance of the notification was also published in the daily newspaper on 12-5-2004. Notices under Sections 8 and 9 of the LA Act were issued during May 2004 to the interested parties. Enquiry was conducted and awards in respect of 1,618. 38 acres of notified land have been passed. The BDA took up the developmental work relating to the scheme by entrusting the same to 22 contractors. The developmental works had been taken up under the supervision and guidance of the engineers of the BDA, the lands were levelled, drainages were formed and other layout works were carried out. 14,103 sites of different dimensions have been formed. BDA has spent crores of rupees in the formation of the layout. BDA also notified its proposal to form layout and invited applications for allotment and received 2,29,000 applications for allotment. The BDA processed the applications in accordance with the Rules. They intended to allot of about 28,000 sites immediately after its development.

(3.) THE landowners and site owners who are the respondents in these appeals preferred writ petitions challenging the said acquisition on various grounds. It was contended that after the seventy-third and Seventy-fourth Amendments to the Constitution adding Parts IX and IX-A and eleventh and Twelfth Schedules, the BDA has no power to take up any scheme for development of any part of Bangalore Metropolitan Area and that such powers are now vested with municipalities and Corporation. There is no public purpose in acquisition of these lands. It violates Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. The provisions of the LA Act have to be followed in acquisition and the said Act prevail over the provisions of the BDA Act. The Commissioner of bda has no power to appoint Land Acquisition Officer and other officers under Section 4 (2) of the LA Act, only the Government could appoint such an officer. The Government is estopped from going back on its promise made under several Government orders and in acquiring lands, as such, the doctrine of promissory estoppel is attracted. There is discrimination and arbitrariness in acquiring the land. The BDA and Government has adopted the policy of pick and choose. Lands belonging to powerful persons have not been touched. While upholding the objections of some of the landowners and excluding such lands from acquisition, the lands belonging to others and similarly situated have been notified for acquisition. There is no valid scheme. Sections 15, 16, 17 and 18 of the BDA Act have not been complied with. There is no application of mind by the BDA in preparing the scheme. There is no application of mind by the Government while according sanction to the scheme under Section 18 (3) of the BDA Act. Therefore, the writ petitioners and respondents contend that these acquisitions are liable to be quashed.