ANDANOOR SHIVALINGAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A Notification was issued under Section 3 of the Karnataka Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') declaring land survey No. 119 situated at Davangere as slum area under the Act. That Notification was challenged by the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 7108 of 1975. That Writ Petition was allowed on 31-5-1976 following the decision of this Court in 1976(1) K.L.J. 417 - THIPPERUDRAPPA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA, reserving liberty to the authorities to issue fresh notification in accordance with law. The principal ground on which that Writ petition was allowed was that the Notification under sub-section (2) of section 3, could not have been tissued under the Act, without giving a notice and an opportunity to the owner of the land of showing cause in the matter. After the Writ Petition was disposed of, a notice dated 20th October, 1976 appears to have been published in the Karnataka Gazette of the 4th November, 1976 proposing to declare the land in question survey No. 119 and some other lands as slum area and inviting persons concerned to submit their representations within fifteen days from the date of publication of the said notice. Thereafter, a notification was issued under Section 3(1) of the Act dated 10th of December, 1976 published in the Gazette dated 10th January, 1977 declaring survey No. 119 and other lands as slum area under the Act.

(2.) The petitioner has challenged the said notification Exhibit 'B' in this Writ Petition.

(3.) The petitioner has asserted in paragraph 5 of Writ Petition that he has not been given any show cause notice before the land was declared as slum area. He has stated that as far-reaching consequences affecting his rights will take place consequent upon the declaration made by the impugned notification, the authorities were required to issue a show cause notice as held by this Court in 1976(1) K.L.J. 417. Our attention was drawn by Sri Minajigi, learned counsel for the petitioner, that it has been ruled in the aforesaid decision that though Section 3 does not, in express terms, contemplate notice and opportunity being given to the persons likely to be affected, such a requirement has to be read into the statutory provision, having regard to the principles of natural justice. There cannot, therefore, be any doubt having regard to the ruling of this Court that before issuing a notification under Section 3(1) of the Act, the authorities are required to issue notice to the persons likely to be affected and to give him an opportunity of showing cause in the matter. Sri Chandan Gowdar, however, takes the stand that the notification published in the Gazette on the 4th of November, 1976 as per Exhibit 'A', is sufficient compliance with this requirement of principles of natural justice as notice has been published in the Gazette proposing to issue a notification in respect of the lands notified, therein as slum area and inviting representations from persons likely to be affected by such notification. Sri Minajigi, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the notice of the type issued in this case by publication in the official gazette, is not final and sufficient notice contemplated by law. He invited our attention to Section 50 of the Act, which reads as follows:-