SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER RAILWAYS AND KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD Vs. MUNIYAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Special Land Acquisition Officer of Karnataka industrial Area Development Board, Bangalore, ('kiadb' for short) and its Secretary are before this Court challenging the order on LA. No. 2 in LAC. No. 136/2004 on the file of the XXIII Additional City Civil and sessions Judge, Bangalore, dated 5-6-2007 whereby the application filed by them under Order 7. Rule 11 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure to dismiss the application of the claimants seekt ing a direction to the Land Acquisition Officer to make a reference has been dismissed by the Civil Court.

(2.) THE land in question in this revision petition is Sy. No. 88/25 measuring 2 acres situated at Nallakadirenahalli village, yeshwarthapur Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk. A preliminary notification was issued under section 28 (1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act for acquisition of the aforesaid land along with several other survey numbers for formation of an industrial area under the Act. The said notification was followed by a final notification under Section 28 (4) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act dated 26-5-1973. Thereafter, the acquisition proceedings have been concluded arid the lands were vested with the state Government and thereafter with the hadb The owners of the land in question were Muniyappa-the first respondent and P. N. Narasappa, the predecessor in title of respondent Nos. 2 (a) to 2 (h) ('claimants' for short ). An award was passed on 30-1-1980. Admittedly, the Claimants filed an application under Section 18 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act ('act' for short) for reference of the "natter for determination of the Court However, the land Acquisition Officer did not refer the matter for determination as provided under sec. 18 (2) of the Act, nor the claimants sought reference under Sec. 18 (3) (b) of the Act.

(3.) IN respect of the land belonging to one b. N. Kempaiah, which was acquired under the same notification, similar award was passed by the acquiring authority. On reference, the Civil Court passed an award on 12-4-2000 in LAC No. 150/1981 enhancing the compensation. Thereafter, the claimants herein made an application under Section 28 (A) of the Act to the Land Acquisition Officer for re-determination of the compensation amount on the basis of the compensation awarded by the Court. Since the Land Acquisition Officer did not pass any order on the said application, the claimants filed writ petitions before this Court in Writ Petition Nos. 30166-30167/2002 seeking a mandamus directing the Land Acquisition Officer to redetermine the compensation under Section 28-A of the Act, in accordance with their application. This Court by the order dated 19-11-2003 directed the Land Acquisition Officer to consider the application of the claimants and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law. Thereafter, the Land Acquisition Officer has passed Annexure 'c' order on 16-2-2004 in case No. LAC (KIADB) 4-34/73-74 rejecting the application under section 28a (2) of the Act. Therefore, the claimants filed an application before the Land Acquisition Officer under Section 28a (3) read with Section 18 (3) of the Act seeking reference of the matter for determination of the court. Since the Land Acquisition Officer did not make the reference, the claimants filed the application under Section 28-A (3) read with section 18 (3) of the Act seeking a direction to the Land Acquisition Officer to make reference for re-determination of the compensation. The said case is numbered as LAC 136/ 2004. In the said case petitioners filed LA. No. 2 under Order 7, Rule 11 read with Section 151 of the Cods of Civil Procedure for dismissal of the application, As stated above, the Civil Court has rejected the said application by the impugned order. Feeling aggrieved by the same, petitioners are before this Court challenging the said order.