ZAKIRUNNISSA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS have questioned the Notification vide Annexure -'f' dated 17. 1. 2006 issued by the 3rd respondent The special Land Acquisition Officer under Section 3 (1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as KIAD Act for short), as also the notices issued under Section 28 (6) of the KIAD Act vide Annexures-'g-1' and 'g-2' dated 15. 5. 2008, calling upon the petitioners to hand over the possession of the acquired properties. The petitioners have also prayed in the writ petition that the South End Metro Railway Station may be located in Survey No. 6/1 and 6/2 of Dasarahalli (Jayanagar Extension ). Alternatively, it is prayed that a direction be issued to the respondents to construct the south End Metro Railway Station as per the original approved design and alignment vide proceedings at Annexure -'a' on the property earlier earmarked for South End Metro Railway Station.

(2.) THE averments in the writ petition disclose that the petitioners herein are the owners of (a) C. T. S. No. 2458. B. B. M. P. Khata No. 16, Corporation Ward No. 50. V. V. Puram, bangalore, East-West measuring 12. 30 x 12. 35 sq. mtrs. and North-South measuring 15. 90 x 15. 90 sq. mtrs, and (b) C. T. S. No. 831, b. B. M. P, Khata No. 75/2, Corporation Ward no. 50. V. V. Puram, Bangalore, East-West measuring 9. 90 x 9. 90 sq. mtrs. and North-South measuring 12. 50 x 12. 60 sq. mtrs. The aforesaid two properties are some of the properties which are sought to be acquired for the purpose of mega project called "bangalore metro Rail Project", along with other adjoining properties. The petition properties and the adjoining properties are being acquired for locating South End Metro Railway Station. According to the petitioners, the report of the proceedings of Government of Karnataka dated 28. 2. 2004 vide Annexure -'a' fixes the place wherein the South End Metro Railway station is to be established; the properties at sl. Nos. 59, 60, 61 and 62 found in Annexure -'a' are the places earmarked earlier for establishing the South End Metro Railway Station and those properties do not include the petition properties. Later, at the behest of the owners of those' properties and the Chief Secretary of the Government of Karnataka, the south End Metro Railway Station is now being shifted about 200 meters away from the earlier place, north side. According to the petitioners, there is no application of mind on the part of respondents 1 to 4 while preparing the report pertaining to Bangalore Metro Rail project that while preparing the project report, the authorities have copied pertain ingredients from other projects; and that the mysore Tramways Act, 1906 cannot be made use of for establishing the Bangalore Metro railway Station or to the acquisition of the land for establishing railway station that the metro railways to be established by the respondents, 1 to 4 under the provisions of mysore Tramways Act, 1906, is improper; that the, project in question will result in sound pollution and will generate lot of dust and vibration in the adjoining areas; that the metro rail project could have been established wholly underground and not above the ground as is being done for the present; that the South end Metro Railway Station is badly planned, inasmuch as, there are hospitals, schools, markets, commercial buildings etc. , in the nearby vicinity and consequently, people are put to greater hardship; that there will be no place for parking of the vehicles, in case, if the station is established in the present location; that the State Government's property is vacant and is available in the nearby area i. e. , just about 500 meters away from the properties in question and that the respondents are not making use of the same for establishing the station; that the design of the railway station is not ready as on this day; that the general public ought to have been consulted before starting the metro rail project: that the KIAD Act is not applicable, inasmuch as, metro rail is not an industry; and that the statement of objections filed by the petitioners to the preliminary notification are not effectively considered by the concerned authorities before passing the Final Notification under Section 28 (4) of KIAD Act.

(3.) THE writ petition is opposed by the respondents by filing their statement of objections. Sri Udaya Holla, learned Advocate General in his leading arguments submits that the place earmarked for establishing South End metro Railway Station is shifted just about 60 meters from the earlier place north side with a view to save the people from traffic and to save Bangalore Hospital which is one of the leading hospital of the area in Bangalore and in order to safeguard the interest of the patients; that if the station is established in the place as decided earlier, then, it would be very difficult for the ambulances and patients to enter the hospital and adjoining establishments; that the establishment of the railway station in a particular place is a policy decision taken by the respondents 1 to 4 based on technical and managerial advise; that the alternative proposals are also considered by the authorities while preparing the project report of metro railway; that the notices of preliminary notification are served on the petitioners, who appeared and filed their statement of objections; that the statement of objections filed by the petitioners are duly considered by the authorities and same are rejected; that the public need not be consulted while establishing the metro rail project, inasmuch as, the public representatives viz. , elected representatives are consulted before establishing the metro rail project; and that the metro rail project will effectively tackle the problems relating to transport of the industrial workers, including general public and therefore the provisions of KIAD Act are applicable to the facts of the case. Sri Udaya holla, further relies upon the judgment of this court in the case of M/s. Lakshmi Builders v. State of Karnataka and others (Writ Petition no. 8288/2008 (LA-KIADB), disposed of on 9th February 2009, in support of his arguments.