CHANDRU R Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has called into question the endorsement dated 23-2-2015 (Annexure-S) turning down the petitioner's request for the withdrawal of the land from acquisition. He has also sought the relief of declaration that the acquisition proceedings in respect of the land in question have lapsed.

(2.) Sri Ravi Varma Kumar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Sri B.B Bajentri for the petitioner submits that the land in question is converted from the agricultural to non-agricultural purpose. Such lands cannot be acquired. In support of his submissions, he relies on this Court's orders dated 22-2-2006 (Annexure-H), 30-5-2011 (Annexure-K) and 1-12-2014 (Annexure-R) in W.P. Nos. 9612 of 2006, 18197 of 2011 and 53180 of 2014 respectively.

(3.) Sri Ravi Varma Kumar further submits that the impugned order is not reflective of the application of mind and consideration of the relevant materials. He brings to my notice the third respondent's report dated 6-8-2013 (Annexure-Q) recommending the withdrawal of the lands in question from the acquisition, as guideline 3 in Junjamma and others Vs. Bangalore Development Authority, ILR 2005 Kar. 608 is applicable to this case. He submits that the said report itself is prepared on holding the spot inspection by the third respondent.