ANAND Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since these writ petitions arise out of the same factual matrix, and raise the same legal issue, they are being decided by this common order.

(2.) Briefly the facts of the case are that the petitioners happen to be residents of Vijayapur, and are the owners of different properties in the said city. The Commissioner, City Municipal Corporation, Vijayapur had promulgated a Master Plan of 2006, wherein a proposal was made to widen the Mahatma Gandhi Road ('M.G.Road' for short) to the extent of 100 feet. In order to carry out the said Master Plan, respondent No.4, the Commissioner issued a notice dated 08.09.2014, to the petitioners, calling them to a meeting for implementation of the Master Plan, and for proposed widening of the road.

(3.) On 23.09.2014, the Commissioner issued a notice and offered a compensation amount to the petitioners, and asked that the properties belonging to petitioners should be handed over to the Corporation. However, as the petitioners were unhappy with the proposed compensation, on 25.09.2014, they filed their objections to the notice dated 23.09.2014, and rejected the offer made by the Commissioner. Since the petitioners were still aggrieved by the proposed action of the Commissioner, they filed a writ petition before this court, namely W.P.No.205731-732/2014, wherein they challenged the notice dated 23.09.2014. During the pendency of the said writ petitions, the learned counsel for Corporation gave an undertaking that the Corporation would not move against the petitioners, without following the due process of law. However, despite the undertaking given by the Corporation, on 18.10.2014, without following the due process of law, the City Municipal Corporation demolished the properties belonging to the petitioners. For two long years, the petitioners kept on hoping that the Corporation would work out the compensation, and would pay the compensation to them. However, despite lapse of two years, the Corporation has failed to pay a single penny to the petitioners. Hence, these petitions before this Court.