NARAYANA RAJU Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are by the Writ Petitioners, whose Writ Petitions were dismissed by the learned Single Judge. ILR 1987 KAR 3008 The petitioners challenged the land acquisition proceedings by questioning the Notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act and the Declaration made under Section 6(1) thereof.

(2.) Petitioners, assert that they are the owners of various lands sought to be acquired for the benefit of Vijaya Bank Employees Housing Co-operative Society Ltd., (referred hereinafter as 'the Society'). By a Notification dated 30-5-1983 published in the Gazette dated 16-6-1983, the State Government notified under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act as in force in Karnataka by the amendment made by the Karnataka Act 17/1961, that "the lands specified in the schedule to the notification are likely to be needed for the public purpose to wi(sic) for the Members of the Vijaya Bank Employees Housing Co-operative Society Ltd., Bangalore at Bileka-halli village, Begur Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, Bangalore District." Public notice was caused to be issued on 2-7-1983 (vide Annexure-B in W.A. No. 1084 to 1089/87). Many of the petitioners (appellants herein) filed their objections to the proposed acquisition. After the enquiry under Section 5-A and the receipt of the report, State Government made a Declaration under Section 6(1) on 1-6-1985 (published in the Karnataka Gazette dated 20-6-1985), relevant para of which reads thus:

(3.) W.P.Nos. 14940 to 14944 of 1985 are dated 12-9-1985; W.P.Nos. 10864 to 10875 of 1985 are dated 15-7-1985; W.P.Nos. 13416 to 13429 of 1985 are dated 26-8-1985; W.P.No. 14065/85 is dated 9-9-1985 and W.P. No. 2311/1987 is dated 2-2-1987. Various grounds though raised in the Writ Petitions, three grounds, ultimately urged, as seen from the order of the learned Single Judge, were:"( i) The Spl. L.A.O. was not authorised to issue notice on 2-7-1983 and therefore all subsequent proceedings are illegal and without jurisdiction notwithstanding the issue of notification dated 12-7-1984 extracted above; (i.e., the order appointing him). (ii) The acquisition is for a Company-Housing Co-operative Society is a Company-Acquisition for 'public purpose' excludes acquisition for a Company since admittedly the Company Rules 1973 are not followed the acquisition is bad. It was contended that both the Notifications are liable to be quashed; (iii) The exercise of power is colourable, all proceedings are violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India."