M SHANKARA RAO Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions are disposed of by a common order since a common point arises for consideration in these petitions.

(2.) These petitions are filed on 4-2-1988 challenging the preliminary notification made on 29-5-1979 and the final declaration dated 19-11-1987 published in the Karnataka Gazette dated 10-12-1987. The point for consideration is whether the petitioners had approached this Court in time for invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.

(3.) The 1st petitioner is the owner of the land bearing Survey No. 58 measuring 18 acres and 23 guntas and the 2nd petitioner is the owner of Survey No. 69 measuring 11 acres. The said lands are situate in the same village, viz., Kallahalli village, Shimoga District. The 2nd petitioner had purchased an extent of 6 acres from the sons of the original owner Kariyappa under a registered Sale Deed dated 3-6-1967. He also acquired another 5 acres from one Ningamma under a Registered sale deed dated 12-6-1967. It is not in dispute that the 1st petitioner made an attempt to form a private layout on the land in Survey No. 58 and with that object he approached the authorities concerned for sanction of the layout on 20-6-1983. He was informed in that connection that a notification had been made in the Official Gazette under Section IS of the Karnataka Improvement Boards Act, 1976 (in short the Act), His case is that he was not informed about the notification and that the scheme was also not sent to the Government for their approval. His application to obtain sanction for the private layout was made on 20-6-1983 and his request was refused by the resolution of the 2nd respondent on 18-11-1983. The 1st petitioner challenged the said resolution on the ground that the same was not communicated within a period of 6 months from the date of request and, accordingly, he informed the 2nd respondent that he was going ahead with the formation of the layout. It transpires that the Chairman of the City Improvement Board, i.e., the 2nd respondent herein, had called the petitioner for negotiations several times; but, the negotiations failed and the 1st petitioner put an end to his negotiations by his letter dated 9-7-1984. Thereafter, the 1st petitioner had entered into several agreements with third parties assuring them that he would allot sites to them and collected advances from them also. But on 18-11-1986 he was served with a notice by the 2nd respondent not to take up any development work on the land in question. That notice was challenged in Writ Petition No. 20655 of 1986 before this Court and the order allowing the said petition is challenged in Writ Appeal No. 389 of 1987 which is pending consideration before the Division Bench. The 2nd respondent has obtained an interim order of stay of the judgment of the learned single Judge in the said writ petition.