(1.) In this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner who is the owner of the lands bearing S.Nos. 71/5, 71/4 &nd 73/7 of Kaikere village, Virajpet Taluk, has challenged the validity of the notifications issued under S. 4(1) and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (Central Act 1 of 1894), as amended by Karnataka Act 17 of 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act').
(2.) By the preliminary notification dated 6.8.1975, the lands bearing S. Nos. 71/1, 71/3,'73/1 and 73/6 belonging to the petitioner were proposed to be acquired for the purpose of opening a road from Gonikoppal Virajpet main road deviating near Cauvery College and reading to Vokkaligar gadde. The petitioner filed his objections, and after enquiring into the objections and after hearing the petitioner, the Asst. Commr. Mercara Sub-Dn. made a report under S.5A of the, Act, Therefore the final notification dated nil, under S. 6 of the "Act came to be published in the official Gazette containing S. Nos. 71/5, 71/4 and 73/1.
(3.) One of the contention urged by Sri Mohandas Hegde, the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the acquisition proceedings are vitiated because of the malafides alleged in the petition. It is aileged that the then Minister for Revenue was responsible for the acquisition in question and as a result of the acquisition the proposed road passes through the Coffice Estate thereby causing irreparable loss and damage to the Coffee Estate. The other contention, is that the lands proposed to be acquired under the preliminary notification were quite different from those notified, in the final notification issued under S. 6 of the Act. Lastly it is contended that if the final notification were to go, the preliminary notificaition also cannot be retained because of the fact that from the date of preliminary notification more than three years have elapsed; therefore no final notification can be issued on the basis of such a preliminary notification in view of the provisions contained in S.6(1A) of the Act.