COMMISSIONER Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This intra Court appeal is filed under Sec. 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 by the Commissioner, Bengaluru Development Authority (BDA) and another, assailing the order of the learned Single Judge dtd. 2/2/2021 passed in W.P.No.5713/2018 (LA-BDA) wherein the writ petition filed by the respondent No.2 was allowed.

(2.) Brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are that the respondent No.2 was the petitioner before the learned Single Judge. It was averred that she is the owner of property bearing old Sy.No.12/2B, re-numbered as Sy.No.12/2B2 measuring 29 guntas including 5 guntas of kharab land situated at Sonnenahalli Village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, Bengaluru. The appellant issued preliminary notification dtd. 14/12/2001 under Sec. 17(1) and 17(3) of the Bangalore Development Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to acquire various extents of land including the land of the respondent No.2 for the formation of Sir M.Vishveshwaraiah Layout. The respondent No.2 filed objections stating that she is running nursery and dairy farm in the schedule property and is residing in the said property. The final notification came to be issued on 31/10/2002. The respondent No.2 submitted representations to withdraw the acquisition proceedings insofar as the land in question. The appellant No.2 passed the award. However, neither any notice of award was served nor payment was made to the respondent No.2. It was further averred that the BDA continued the acquisition only for 2 guntas of the land out of 29 guntas of the property of the respondent No.2 and formed the road and the acquisition has been abandoned for the remaining extent.

(3.) The learned Single Judge, by the impugned order, held that the appellants have not taken the possession nor paid the compensation to the remaining extent of land. It is further held that the acquisition proceedings insofar as the land of the respondent No.2 excluding the land for which award has been passed, could be said to have been abandoned and accordingly, the notifications were quashed. Being aggrieved, the BDA is in appeal.