- 1 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, R KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE11H DAY OF JULY, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION No.206277 OF2016(LB-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION No.200431 OF2017(LB-RES) WRIT PETITION No.200432 OF2017(LB-RES) WRIT PETITION No.200433 OF2017(LB-RES) WRIT PETITION No.200434 OF2017(LB-RES) WRIT PETITION No.200435 OF2017(LB-RES) WRIT PETITION No.200436 OF2017(LB-RES) WRIT PETITION No.200438 OF2017(LB-RES WRIT PETITION No.201749 OF2017(LB-RES) IN W.P.No.206277/2016 BETWEEN:
1. SRI.AJEET S/O BABU SALIYAN AGE:37, OCC:BUSINESS2 SRI.ARUNKUMAR S/O BABU SALIYAN AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
3. SRI VASANT S/O SHANKAR ROHITE AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
4. SRI MUKUND S/O KRISHNAJI NIKAM AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.-. 2 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters 5. SMT KASTURIBAI W/O VITHAL BURUD @ ROHITE AGE:MAJOR, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK.
6. SRI BAPU S/O VITHAL BURUD AGE:48 YEARS OCC:BUSINESS.
7. SRI ASHOK KUMAR S/O MALLAPPA PARAMSHETTI AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
8. SMT LEELAVATI W/O GOVINDARAO KULKARNI AGE:MAJOR, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK, 9. SRI PRAHLAD S/O BHEEMRAO MUTALIK AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
10. SMT VIDYA W/O GAJANAN KOLATKAR AGE:MAJOR, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK11 SRI KRISHNARAO S/O NARASHIMHARAO KULKARNI AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS, 12. SMT JAYASHREE W/O RAMANJANEYA RAJABANDI AGE:MAJOR, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK.
13. SMT SHARADA W/O BABASAHEB GULAGANJI AGE:MAJOR, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK.
14. SMT SHARADA - 3 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters W/O RAMCHANDARA CHAVAN AGE:MAJOR, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK.
15. SRI MAHADEV S/O KRISHNAJI DANNI AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
16. SRI SRISHAILAPPA S/O IRAPPA PATTAR AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
17. SRI ERANNA S/O SRISHAILAPPA PATTAR AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
18. SRI GURURAJ S/O SRISHAILAPPA PATTAR AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
19. SRI MOUNESH S/O SRISHAILAPPA PATTAR AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
20. SMT AKKUTAI W/O LAXMAN BURUD @ ROHITE AGE:MAJOR, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK.
21. SRI RAMESH S/O LAXMAN BURAD AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
22. SRI RAYAPPA S/O LAXMAN BURUD @ ROHITE AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS23 SMT SHANTABAI W/O LAXMAN BURUD @ ROHITE AGE:MAJOR, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK.-. 4 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters 24. SRI BASAVARAJ S/O SANGAMESH MANAGOND AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
25. SRI HEMANT S/O BASAVARAJ MANAGOND AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
26. SRI UDAYKUMAR S/O MURALIDHAR DARBAR AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
27. SRI. ANAND S/O RAMESH KARANDE AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
28. SRI JAYADEEP S/O MANOHAR DESAI AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
29. SRI VIJAY S/O MANOHAR DESAI AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
30. SMT RAMA W/O PANDURANG DESAI AGE:MAJOR, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK.
31. DR.SARAYUBAI W/O NARAYAN DESAI AGE:MAJOR, OCC:DOCTOR.
32. SMT. ANJALI W/O BHARAT JOG AGE:MAJOR, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK.
33. SMT DEEPTI W/O JAYANTH MARAHTE AGE:MAJOR, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK.
34. SMT S.M.DESAI AGE:MAJOR, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK.
35. SRI. RAMESH S/O TULAJARAM MAHINDRAKAR AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS, - 5 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters 36. SRI MALLIKARJUN S/O SANGAPPA SHILLIN AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS, 37. SRI SAMRATMAL S/O JOSSAGI BATI AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS, 38. SRI PUNDALIK S/O NANASAHEB JADHAV AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
39. ISHWAR S/O SIDRAMAPPA SAVALAGI, AGE:MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS40 SMT LEELAVATIBAI W/O LAXMICHAND SHAH AGE:MAJOR, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK.
41. KHWAJASAHEB S/O GAIBUSAB KOLHAR AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
42. SRI AMIT S/O SHANKAR @ SHASHIR JOSHI AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
43. JEETENDRAKUMAR S/O DALICHAND SHAH AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
44. BASHIR M SUTAR AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
45. VINAY S/O SHESHADASACHARYA JAHAGIRDAR AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS.
46. PREETI W/O VIJAYKUMAR PATIL AGE:MAJOR, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK.
47. G.K.ANILKUMAR S/O GIRIRAJ KISHOR GUPTA AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS, - 6 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters 48. SRI. JAYAPRAKASH MANOHAR MAHINDRAKAR AGED:
58. YEARS OCC: BUSINESS, PETITIONERS ARE ALL R/O VIJAYPUR, TQ. & DIST. VIJAYPUR. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. S S MAMADAPUR, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS PRINICIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER VIJAYAPUR AT VIJAYAPUR.
4. THE COMMISSIONER CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION M.G.ROAD, VIJAYAPUR-586101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MAYA T.R., HCGP FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. AMARESH S. ROJA., ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES226AND227OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR
ORDEROR ANY OTHER DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT DIRECTIG THE RESPONDENTS TO PAY THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT TO THE PETITIONERS @ RS.4,750/- PER SQUARE FEET WITH100SOLATIUM ND INTEREST ON DELAYED PAYMENT IN TERMS OF THE COMPROMISE PETITION VIDE ANNEXURE D AND THE
ORDERDATED2207.2016 PASSED BY THIS HON BLE COURT IN WP No.205692/2015 AND OTHER CONNECTED MATTERS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.-. 7 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters IN W.P.No.200431/2017 BETWEEN: SMT.CHETNA W/O ANANT JAIN AGE:29-YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O. LINGAD ROAD, NEAR H.P GAS AGENCY VIJAYPUR DIST:VIJAYPUR (AMENDED AS PER
ORDEROF COURT DATED58.2020) ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. VINAYAK APTE., ADVOCATE) AND1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT IOF MUNCIPAL ADMINISTRATION VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001 2 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OPPOSITE CITY CENTRAL BUS STAND VIJAYPUR-586101 4 . THE COMMISSIONER CITY MUNCIPAL CORPORATION GANDHI CHOWK VIJAYPUR-586101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MAYA T.R., HCGP FOR R1-3; SRI. AMARESH S. ROJA., ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES226AND227OF THE CONSITTUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE
ORDEROR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING ANNEXURE J DATED2729.08.2016, PASSED IN FILE No.M.N.PA.V/KAM.V/2016- 17/920 PASSED BY RESPONDENT No.4 AND ETC.-. 8 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters IN W.P.No.200432/2017 BETWEEN: MADANLAL S/O. MITHALAL JAIN AGE:64-YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS R/O. AKKAMAHADEVI ROAD, NEAR ANAND HOSPITAL CIRCLE VIJAYPUR DIST:VIJAYAPUR (AMENDED AS PER
ORDERCOURT
ORDERDATED58.2020) ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. VINAYAK APTE., ADVOCATE) AND1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT IOF MUNCIPAL ADMINISTRATION VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 2 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OPPOSITE CITY CENTRAL BUS STAND VIJAYPUR-586101 4 . THE COMMISSIONER CITY MUNCIPAL CORPORATION GANDHI CHOWK VIJAYPUR-586101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MAYA T.R., HCGP FOR R1-3; SRI. AMARESH S. ROJA., ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES226AND227OF THE CONSITTUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE
ORDEROR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING ANNEXURE J DATED2729.08.2016, PASSED IN FILE No.M.N.PA.V/KAM.V/2016- 17/920 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 AND ETC.-. 9 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters IN W.P.No.200433/2017 BETWEEN: ANANTKUMAR S/O. KAMAL KUMAR JAIN AGE:30-YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS R/O. LINGAD ROAD, NEAR H.P GAS AGENCY VIJAYPUR DIST:VIJAYPUR (AMENDED AS PER COURT
ORDERDATED58.2020) ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. VINAYAK APTE., ADVOCATE) AND1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT IOF MUNCIPAL ADMINISTRATION VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 2 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OPPOSITE CITY CENTRAL BUS STAND VIJAYPUR-586101 4 . THE COMMISSIONER CITY MUNCIPAL CORPORATION GANDHI CHOWK VIJAYPUR-586101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MAYA T.R., HCGP FOR R1-3; SRI. AMARESH S. ROJA., ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES226AND227OF THE CONSITTUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE
ORDEROR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING ANNEXURE J DATED2729.08.2016, PASSED IN FILE No.No.M.N.PA.V/KAM.V/2016-17/920 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 AND ETC.-. 10 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters IN W.P.No.200434/2017 BETWEEN: PAVANKUMAR S/O MITHALAL JAIN AGE:52-YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS R/O. AKKAMAHADEVI ROAD, NEAR ANAND HOSPITAL CIRCLE VIJAYPUR DIST:VIJAYAPUR (AMENDED AS PER COURT
ORDERDATED58.2020) ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. VINAYAK APTE., ADVOCATE) AND1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT IOF MUNCIPAL ADMINISTRATION VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 2 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OPPOSITE CITY CENTRAL BUS STAND VIJAYPUR-586101 4 . THE COMMISSIONER CITY MUNCIPAL CORPORATION GANDHI CHOWK VIJAYPUR-586101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MAYA T.R., HCGP FOR R1-3; SRI. AMARESH S. ROJA., ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES226AND227OF THE CONSITTUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE
ORDEROR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING ANNEXURE J DATED2729.08.2016, PASSED IN FILE No.- 11 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters No.M.N.PA.V/KAM.V/2016-17/920 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 AND ETC. IN W.P.No.200435/2017 BETWEEN: ANANDKUMAR S/O MITHALAL JAIN AGE:58-YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS R/O. AKKAMAHADEVI ROAD, NEAR ANAND HOSPITAL CIRCLE VIJAYPUR DIST:VIJAYAPUR (AMENDED AS PER COURT
ORDERDATED58.2020) ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. VINAYAK APTE., ADVOCATE) AND1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT IOF MUNCIPAL ADMINISTRATION VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 2 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OPPOSITE CITY CENTRAL BUS STAND VIJAYPUR-586101 4 . THE COMMISSIONER CITY MUNCIPAL CORPORATION GANDHI CHOWK VIJAYPUR-586101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MAYA T.R., HCGP FOR R1-3; SRI. AMARESH S. ROJA., ADVOCATE FOR R4) - 12 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES226AND227OF THE CONSITTUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE
ORDEROR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING ANNEXURE E DATED2729.08.2016, PASSED IN FILE No.No.M.N.PA.V/KAM.V/2016-17/920 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 AND ETC. IN W.P.No.200436/2017 BETWEEN: AKASH S/O MADANLAL JAIN AGE:42-YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS R/O. AKKAMAHADEVI ROAD, NEAR ANAND HOSPITAL CIRCLE VIJAYPUR DIST:VIJAYAPUR (AMENDED AS PER COURT
ORDERDATED58.2020) ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. VINAYAK APTE., ADVOCATE) AND1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT IOF MUNCIPAL ADMINISTRATION VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 2 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OPPOSITE CITY CENTRAL BUS STAND VIJAYPUR-586101 4 . THE COMMISSIONER CITY MUNCIPAL CORPORATION GANDHI CHOWK VIJAYPUR-586101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MAYA T.R., HCGP FOR R1-3; SRI. AMARESH S. ROJA., ADVOCATE FOR R4) - 13 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES226AND227OF THE CONSITTUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE
ORDEROR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING ANNEXURE J DATED2729.08.2016, PASSED IN FILE No.No.M.N.PA.V/KAM.V/2016-17/920 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 AND ETC. IN W.P.No.200438/2017 BETWEEN: KAMALKUMAR S/O MITHALAL JAIN AGE:61-YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS R/O. LINGAD ROAD, NEAR H.P GAS AGENCY VIJAYPUR DIST:VIJAYPUR ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. VINAYAK APTE., ADVOCATE) AND1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT IOF MUNCIPAL ADMINISTRATION VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 2 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OPPOSITE CITY CENTRAL BUS STAND VIJAYPUR-586101 4 . THE COMMISSIONER CITY MUNCIPAL CORPORATION GANDHI CHOWK VIJAYPUR-586101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MAYA T.R., HCGP FOR R1-3; SRI. AMARESH S. ROJA., ADVOCATE FOR R4) - 14 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES226AND227OF THE CONSITTUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE
ORDEROR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING ANNEXURE J DATED2729.08.2016, PASSED IN FILE No.No.M.N.PA.V/KAM.V/2016-17/920 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 AND ETC. IN W.P.No.201749/2017 BETWEEN: THE BIJAPUR UNION CLUB VIJAYPUR, REP BY ITS SECRETARY, SRI.NINGANAGOUDA S/O KATYAPPAGOUDA PATIL AGED ABOUT68YEARS OCC: SECRETARY THE BIJAPUR UNION CLUB R/O THE BIJAPUR UNION CLUB M.G.ROAD, VIJAYPUR ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. VINAYAK APTE., ADVOCATE) AND1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT IOF MUNCIPAL ADMINISTRATION VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 2 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OPPOSITE CITY CENTRAL BUS STAND VIJAYPUR-586101 4 . THE COMMISSIONER CITY MUNCIPAL CORPORATION GANDHI CHOWK VIJAYPUR-586101 …RESPONDENTS - 15 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters (BY SMT. MAYA T.R., HCGP FOR R1-3; SRI. AMARESH S. ROJA., ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES226AND227OF THE CONSITTUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE
ORDEROR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING ANNEXURE J DATED2729.08.2016, PASSED IN FILE No.No.M.N.PA.V/KAM.V/2016- 17/920 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 AND ETC. THESE WRIT PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER1 In W.P.No.206277/2016, the petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a. Issue a writ of mandamus or order or any other direction in the nature of writ directing the respondents to pay the compensation amount to the petitioners @ Rs.4750/- per square feet with 100% solatium and interest on delayed payment in terms of the compromise petition vide Annexure-D and the order dated 22.07.2016 passed by this Hon’ble Court in WP.No.205692/2015 and other connected matters in the interest of justice and equity. b. Grant such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant under the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. In W.P.No.200431/2017, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
1. Issue order or writ in the nature of certiorari quashing Annexure-J dated:27/29.08.2016, passed in file No.M.N.PA.V/KAM.V/2016-17/920 passed by Respondent No.4.
2) Issue order or writ or direction in the mandamus directing the respondent No.3 & 4 to pay compensation at the rate of Rs.4,750/- as agreed - 16 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters by them in order dated 22.07.2016 passed in W.P.No.205692/2015 and other connected matters, in the interest of justice and equity.
3) Issue any order or writ or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.
3. In W.P.No.200432/2017, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
1. Issue order or writ in the nature of certiorari quashing Annexure-J dated:27/29.08.2016, passed in file No.M.N.PA.V/KAM.V/2016-17/920 passed by Respondent No.4.
2) Issue order or writ or direction in the mandamus directing the respondent No.3 & 4 to pay compensation at the rate of Rs.4,750/- as agreed by them in order dated 22.07.2016 passed in W.P.No.205692/2015 and other connected matters, in the interest of justice and equity.
3) Issue any order or writ or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.
4. In W.P.No.200433/2017, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
1. Issue order or writ in the nature of certiorari quashing Annexure-J dated:27/29.08.2016, passed in file No.M.N.PA.V/KAM.V/2016-17/920 passed by Respondent No.4.
2) Issue order or writ or direction in the mandamus directing the respondent No.3 & 4 to pay compensation at the rate of Rs.4,750/- as agreed - 17 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters by them in order dated 22.07.2016 passed in W.P.No.205692/2015 and other connected matters, in the interest of justice and equity.
3) Issue any order or writ or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.
5. In W.P.No.200434/2017, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
1. Issue order or writ in the nature of certiorari quashing Annexure-J dated:27/29.08.2016, passed in file No.M.N.PA.V/KAM.V/2016-17/920 passed by Respondent No.4.
2) Issue order or writ or direction in the mandamus directing the respondent No.3 & 4 to pay compensation at the rate of Rs.4,750/- as agreed by them in order dated 22.07.2016 passed in W.P.No.205692/2015 and other connected matters, in the interest of justice and equity.
3) Issue any order or writ or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.
6. In W.P.No.200435/2017, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
1. Issue order or writ in the nature of certiorari quashing Annexure-E dated:27/29.08.2016, passed in file No.M.N.PA.V/KAM.V/2016-17/920 passed by Respondent No.4.
2) Issue order or writ or direction in the mandamus directing the respondent No.3 & 4 to pay compensation at the rate of Rs.4,750/- as agreed - 18 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters by them in order dated 22.07.2016 passed in W.P.No.205692/2015 and other connected matters, in the interest of justice and equity.
3) Issue any order or writ or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.
7. In W.P.No.200436/2017, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
1. Issue order or writ in the nature of certiorari quashing Annexure-J dated:27/29.08.2016, passed in file No.M.N.PA.V/KAM.V/2016-17/920 passed by Respondent No.4.
2) Issue order or writ or direction in the mandamus directing the respondent No.3 & 4 to pay compensation at the rate of Rs.4,750/- as agreed by them in order dated 22.07.2016 passed in W.P.No.205692/2015 and other connected matters, in the interest of justice and equity.
3) Issue any order or writ or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.
8. In W.P.No.200438/2017, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
1. Issue order or writ in the nature of certiorari quashing Annexure-J dated:27/29.08.2016, passed in file No.M.N.PA.V/KAM.V/2016-17/920 passed by Respondent No.4.
2) Issue order or writ or direction in the mandamus directing the respondent No.3 & 4 to pay - 19 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters compensation at the rate of Rs.4,750/- as agreed by them in order dated 22.07.2016 passed in W.P.No.205692/2015 and other connected matters, in the interest of justice and equity.
3) Issue any order or writ or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.
9. In W.P.No.201749/2017, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
1. Issue order or writ in the nature of certiorari quashing Annexure-J dated:27/29.08.2016, passed in file No.M.N.PA.V/KAM.V/2016-17/920 passed by Respondent No.4.
2) Issue order or writ or direction in the mandamus directing the respondent No.3 & 4 to pay compensation at the rate of Rs.4,750/- as agreed by them in order dated 22.07.2016 passed in W.P.No.205692/2015 and other connected matters, in the interest of justice and equity.
3) Issue any order or writ or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.
10. In all the above matters, the petitioners are before this Court seeking for a mandamus directing the respondents to make compensation amount to the petitioners @ Rs.4750/- per square feet with 100% solatium and interest on delayed payment in terms - 20 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters of orders passed in the case of Sri.Rajendra Builders vs. The State of Karnataka1.
11. The grievance of the petitioners is that the petitioners are the owners of various properties situated at M.G.Road, Vijaypur (from Tripurasundari Circle to Shivaji Circle) and portion of these properties though had been earmarked in the master plan for the purpose of widening, without acquiring the said land, the City Municipal Corporation, Vijaypur now being re-designated as Corporation on account of Vijaypur being the District Headquarters had issued notices to the owners to attend a meeting on 15.02.2014 to determine the market value. In the said meeting, no consensus having been arrived, on 23.09.2014, the officers of the Corporation had directed the owners to file their willingness of handing over the property and accept the 1 W.P.No.205692/2015 dated 22.07.2016 - 21 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters compensation fixed by the officials of the Corporation.
12. Some of the owners had approached this Court in W.P.Nos.205704-705/2014 challenging the said notice and this Court vide order dated 14.10.2014 recorded the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the Corporation that they would follow the due process for acquiring the property and on that basis, disposed of the said Writ Petitions. Despite the undertaking given, no acquisition was conducted but the Corporation officials went ahead and demolished the construction of few of the petitioners which had been put up and the respondents went ahead with widening of the road without acquisition.
13. Subsequently, some of the landlosers approached this Court in W.P.Nos.205763-764/2014 for re- determination of the market value of the land and a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court directed the Deputy Commissioner, Vijaypur to negotiate with the - 22 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters petitioners the compensation to be payable in terms of Sections 26 and 28 of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, ‘Act of 2013’). The petitioners in those petitions arrived at a compromise and a compromise petition was filed in the aforesaid Writ Petitions on 20.07.2016 and certain amounts were agreed upon in terms of Paras 9, 10, 11 and 12 of the said order which are reproduced here under for easy reference.
9. According to the Consent Terms', the respondents have agreed to take common base rate as Rs. 4,950/- per square feet of the land, for those properties situate between Sri Basaveshwar Circle to Tripurasundari Circle, and Rs.4,750/- per square feet of the land, for those properties situate between Tripurasundari Circle to Shivaji Circle. According to the parties, this common base rate has been fixed, keeping in mind the reasonable market value of properties, situated on this stretch of road, and this common base rate would form the basis for calculation of compensation offered in terms of Section 26 of the Act.
10. The respondents have also agreed to pay 100% Solatium to the petitioners in line with Section 30 (1) of the Act.
11. Furthermore, the respondents have agreed to offer interest at the rate of 12% per annum for the Twenty-four months, in line with Section 30 (3) of the Act.-. 23 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters 12. The respondents have also agreed to pay the value of the structures, which have been damaged, in terms of Section 28 of the Act, and as per the assessment done by the Public Works Department, as considered in the total amount offered vide notice dated 23.09.2014.
14. Apart from the above aspects relating to the consideration, there are various other aspects as regards which a compromise was arrived at, which was made part of the said order. The petitioners in the present petitions were not however provided with the same accommodation and/or the same compensation despite the petitioners having approached the respondents and it is in that background the petitioners are before this Court.
15. Sri.S.S.Madapur and Sri.Vinayak Apte, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that there cannot be discrimination in the compensation paid towards the acquisition of the land and this Court in its order has already observed the same and had directed the respondents to determine the market - 24 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters value and make offer to the petitioners despite which the same has not been done. He therefore submits that it is for this Court to pass necessary orders.
16. Sri.Amresh S.Roja, learned counsel for the Corporation would submit that negotiations would have to be conducted by the Deputy Commissioner. The Corporation has no role to play in the same and as such, the entire blame is cast on the Deputy Commissioner.
17. Smt.Maya T.R., learned HCGP appearing for the State and the Deputy Commissioner would submit that in the order dated 20.07.2016 in W.P.No.207059/2014 and other connected matters, this Court has categorically held that the compromise arrived at is only between the parties to the said Writ Petitions and the same cannot be treated as a precedent, and as such, she submits that the same amounts cannot be made available as compensation to the petitioners. She further submits that in - 25 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters respect of some other similarly situated land owners, the said land owners have accepted the amounts offered by the Deputy Commissioner and as such, she submits that the present petitions cannot be sustained and are required to be dismissed.
18. Heard Sri.S.S.Madapur and Sri.Vinayak Apte, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri.Amresh S.Roja, learned counsel for the Corporation and Smt.Maya T.R., learned HCGP appearing for the State and the Deputy Commissioner and perused papers.
19. This is yet another shocking case where governmental authorities have without even acquiring the land have forcibly entered the property of private persons, demolished the construction put up and widened the road. The object of widening of the road may be laudable but the State and its authorities are required to follow the due process of law before doing so. It is trite that nobody can be higher than the law applicable.-. 26 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters 20. The land of the petitioners though earmarked for the purpose of widening of the road in the master plan had never been acquired by the State nor any proposal been put up by the Corporation for that acquisition. Merely because the land is demarcated for the purpose of widening would not amount to acquisition. Once the land is demarcated for widening it is but required that the concerned Planning Authority and/or Corporation acquire the said land for the purpose of widening thereof. The master plan is required to be in accordance with the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961 (for short, ‘KTCP Act) and any demarcation thereof for a particular purpose is required to be reflected in the master plan. In terms of Section 12 thereof, the Master Plan shall consist of a series of maps and documents indicating the manner in which the development and improvement of the entire planning area within the jurisdiction of the Planning Authority - 27 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters are to be carried out and regulated, such plan shall include proposals for zoning of land, present land use maps and proposed land use maps, street patterns indicating major and minor roads, areas reserved for parks etc.
21. In terms of Section 69 of KTCP Act, the Planning Authority may acquire any land designated in the master plan for ‘public purposes’ by agreement or under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act as in force in the State. The explanation of sub-section (1) of Section 69 indicates that ‘designated for public purpose’ means designated for the purpose of providing parks, open spaces, public or semi public utilities and infrastructure relating to transport, Roads or widening of the roads would come within the ambit of infrastructure relating to transport. Thus, in terms of sub-section (1) of Section 69, a Planning Authority would only get a right to acquire the land designated - 28 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters for a specific public purpose even though it may be for a purpose of widening of a road. Mere designation would not either vest the land with the Planning Authority nor would owner of the land lose his rights over the said land.
22. In the present case, admittedly there is only a demarcation of the land of the petitioners for purpose of widening of M.G.Road. There is no acquisition notification which has been issued in pursuance of section 69 of the KTCP Act either by the Planning Authority or the State. The Planning Authority, in the present matter, being the Bijapur Development Urban Development Authority now the Vijaypura Urban Development Authority, neither the Planning Authority nor the State having acquired the land, the land continued to be vested with the landowner. In such circumstances, the land had not been acquired or vested with the authorities, it is impermissible for respondent No.4 and/or its officers to enter upon the private property of the petitioners - 29 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters let alone demolish the same. Such acts committed by respondent No.4 authorities are completely high handed, a fraud on power and misuse of the powers vested with them.
23. Having done so, the land loosers having come forward before this Court not challenging the use of the land but seeking for just compensation, it was for respondent No.4 as also State to make available just compensation which also has not been done till now, despite the directions issued by this Court as also despite the compromise entered into by certain other owners in WP No.207059/2014 and WP No.207122/2014 and connected matters.
24. Though it is sought to contended that the said order cannot be treated as a precedent and the petitioners would not be eligible for compensation, as per the compromise entered into therein, this Court vide order dated 19.08.2020 has rejected the said contention and by relying upon the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Nagpur - 30 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters Improvement Trust and another versus Vithal Rao and others2 has come to a conclusion that the State or its agencies cannot discriminate the compensation payable to a land losers and that all land losers would have to be treated on par and compensation be paid. Despite this, neither the State nor respondent No.4 have deemed it fit to make available just compensation to the petitioners. The Corporation only contending that it is for the Deputy Commissioner to negotiate and for the State to make payment of the compensation.
25. The submission of learned HCGP in this regard is that upon negotiations being held, the claim of the petitioners has been rejected and as such the petitioners cannot claim for more than what has been offered by the Deputy Commissioner. 2 AIR1973SC689- 31 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters 26. As observed above, this is a shocking case where government authorities have forcefully entered the land of a private individual and demolished the same though for a laudable purpose of widening the road. As afore detailed, it is only on acquisition of the land that the States or its authorities would get a right over the land of a private citizen. It does not now lie for the Corporation to state that the payment of compensation is to be left to the account of the Deputy Commissioner and the State. When it is the officials of the Corporation who forcibly entered the property of a private individuals. Though it is contended that even the officials of the State Government were present at the time of demolition, it still remains that neither the Corporation nor the State Government or its officials could have taken the law unto themselves and entered the private property. It is therefore required that necessary enquiry be held into the actions of the officials of the Corporation and the office of the State Government - 32 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters who were present on that date. The Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka is directed to get an enquiry conducted in relation to such actions and submit a report within a period of three months from today. It will also be required that the Chief Secretary issue necessary instructions to all concerned that no public authority should enter into a land of a private person without the acquisition of the said land being complete in terms of the concerned enactment.
27. In the present case, enough and more leeway has been granted by several Benches of this Court to the Corporation and the State to arrive at the amicable settlement by determining the compensation that will be paid by the State to the landlosers, despite which the said opportunities given to them have not been utilized.
28. In that view of the matter, the only two options which are available is for the land which has been taken possession of by the respondent No.4 - - 33 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters Corporation without acquisition to be either returned back to the petitioners since taking possession thereof is illegal or for the State to acquire the land by issuance of necessary notification under the provision of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The option, of course, would be that of the State. In that view of the matter, I pass the following:
ORDERi. The Writ Petitions are allowed. ii. The respondent No.2 is at liberty to acquire the land of the petitioners in terms of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 by issuance of necessary notification within a period of 60 days from date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, failing which, the respondent No.4 shall hand over the possession - 34 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters land of the land of the respective petitioners back to the petitioners within 60 days thereafter. iii. Irrespective of the option chosen the state shall make payment of damages towards the use of the land from the time that possession was unauthorizedly taken to the date on which the possession is landed over @ Rs. 15 per square feet per month, being 0.3% of value of land agreed to be paid under the compromise in WP No.207059/2014 and WP No.207122/2014. iv. As regards damages caused to the petitioners on account of unlawful demolition, the petitioners are at liberty to file necessary suit claiming for compensation. v. In the event of the respondent No.2 choosing to acquire the land, the acquisition shall be completed and the necessary compensation be paid to the petitioners under the Act of 2013 by taking the value of the land as on the date on which the notification is issued, the notification - 35 - NC:
2023. KHC-K:5186 WP No.206277 of 2016 and Connected matters to issued not later than 60 days from date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Sd/- JUDGE PRS List No.:
1. Sl No.:
9.