Case Note & Summary
The High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, delivered a CAV order on 27 September 2024 in two connected writ petitions, WP No. 101473/2023 and WP No. 104671/2023, both filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The petitions were directed against the state authorities concerning the acquisition and subsequent de-notification of land under the Karnataka Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956. The dispute centered on lands bearing Survey No. 37/2B (1 acre 26 guntas) owned by Ningappa Walikar and Survey No. 37/3A (6 acres 18 guntas 15 annas) belonging to the legal heirs of Hanumanthappa Talawar. The lands were initially notified under Section 3 of the Slum Act in 1992. The authorities took possession and allotted sites to approximately 457 slum dwellers, who constructed houses and had been residing there for over twenty years. Despite the acquisition and possession, compensation was not paid to the landowners. Aggrieved, Ningappa Walikar submitted a representation in 2015-16 seeking compensation. When no action was taken, he filed WP No. 103081/2016, which was disposed of with a direction to the authorities to consider the representation. Contempt proceedings in CCC No. 100054/2018 were later initiated due to non-compliance. On 16 November 2018, the authorities issued a preliminary notification for acquisition. However, on 11 April 2022, the State Government issued a de-notification, effectively withdrawing the entire acquisition process. This de-notification became the target of the present writ petitions. In WP No. 101473/2023, the petitioner sought certiorari to quash the de-notification notification dated 11.04.2022 (Annexure-K) and mandamus to direct the respondents to take further steps pursuant to the earlier notification dated 16.11.2018. In WP No. 104671/2023, the petitioners additionally challenged reports of the Assistant Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner recommending de-notification, and prayed for compensation under Section 20 of the Slum Act, or alternatively, for relocation of the slum dwellers and restoration of vacant possession. The petitioners' counsel contended that the de-notification was passed without hearing, arbitrary, and malafide. It was argued that the action violated Article 300-A of the Constitution, as the landowners had been deprived of their land for nearly thirty years without any compensation. They relied on the Supreme Court decision in Satendra Prasad Jain v. State of U.P., (1993) 4 SCC 369, to advance the proposition that once possession is taken under Section 17(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the Government cannot withdraw from the acquisition under Section 48. They submitted that a similar principle should apply to acquisitions under the Slum Act, especially since there is no provision for de-notification in that Act. It was also pointed out that even the Slum Board had recommended against de-notification. The court reserved the matter and subsequently pronounced the CAV order. The excerpt provided ends before the court's analysis and final decision. However, from the nature of the prayers and arguments, the core legal issues before the court included the validity of the de-notification in the absence of statutory authority, the right to compensation under Article 300-A and the Slum Act, and the obligation of the state to complete the acquisition process once possession has been taken.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the de-notification of land already acquired and possessed under the Karnataka Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956, can be effected without payment of compensation, and whether the respondents can be directed to pay compensation and restore notifications
Case Details
2024 LawText (KAR) (09) 12
Writ Petition No. 101473 of 2023 c/w Writ Petition No. 104671 of 2023
Santosh B. Malligawad, Vijayendra Bhimakkanavar, Keshavareddy, Praveen K. Uppar, Raviraj C. Patil, C.S. Patil
Ningappa S/o. Mallappa Walikar @ Talwar (WP 101473/2023) and Hanumanthappa S/o. Ningappa Talawar @ Walikar (deceased) by LRs (WP 104671/2023)
State of Karnataka and Others (including Karnataka Slum Clearance Board, Deputy Commissioner, etc.)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking certiorari to quash a de-notification notification dated 11.04.2022 issued under the Karnataka Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956, and mandamus to direct respondents to proceed with earlier notifications and pay compensation under Section 20 of the Act, or alternatively to pay damages and relocate slum dwellers and hand over vacant possession.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought quashing of the de-notification notification, direction to respondents to take further steps pursuant to notification dated 16.11.2018, payment of compensation under Section 20 of the Slum Act, and alternative relief of relocation of slum dwellers and handover of vacant possession.
Filing Reason
The respondent authorities had initially notified petitioners' land under the Slum Act, taken possession, allotted sites to slum dwellers, but later de-notified the acquisition without paying compensation, in violation of Article 300-A and without any statutory provision for de-notification.
Previous Decisions
Earlier, the petitioner in WP 101473/2023 had filed WP No.103081/2016 seeking consideration of representation for compensation; the court allowed it with direction to consider; contempt proceedings were initiated in CCC No.100054/2018; the respondents issued preliminary notification on 16.11.2018 but later de-notified on 11.04.2022.
Issues
Whether the de-notification dated 11.04.2022 of the land already notified under the Karnataka Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956 is valid in law, particularly when possession has been taken and there is no provision for withdrawal under the Act.
Whether the petitioners are entitled to compensation under Section 20 of the Slum Act for the land acquired and possessed by the respondents.
Whether the respondents can be directed to proceed with the preliminary notification dated 16.11.2018 and finalize the acquisition process.
Submissions/Arguments
The de-notification notification is erroneous, passed without hearing, arbitrary and malafide.
The action violates Article 300-A as the petitioners have been deprived of land and compensation for 30 years.
Once possession was taken under Section 17 of the Slum Act, the respondents cannot de-notify as there is no such provision under the Act.
The land was notified in 1992, possession taken, allotment made to 457 families, and the respondents cannot withdraw from acquisition.
Reliance on Satendra Prasad Jain v. State of U.P., (1993) 4 SCC 369, to argue that once possession is taken under Section 17(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, the government cannot withdraw from acquisition under Section 48, and the same principle applies.
The respondents recommended against de-notification, and the de-notification would prejudice the allottees as well.
Judgment Excerpts
The land belonging to the petitioner bearing R.S.No.37/2B measuring 1 Acre 26 Guntas ... notification was issued without even hearing the petitioners.
Once the notification was issued under Section 17 of the Slum Act, ought to have finalized determining the compensation.
Once the land was acquired and possession was taken, the respondents cannot de-notify the same and under the Act there is no such provision.
The impugned action of the respondents is violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India inasmuch as petitioner is deprived of the land and compensation for subject land.
Procedural History
In 1992, the lands were notified under Section 3 of the Karnataka Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act. Possession was taken and sites were allotted to approximately 457 families who constructed houses and have resided there for over 20 years. In 2015-16, the landowner submitted a representation seeking compensation. Due to inaction, WP No. 103081/2016 was filed and allowed with directions to consider the representation. Contempt proceedings (CCC No. 100054/2018) were initiated when directions were not complied with. On 16.11.2018, a preliminary notification for acquisition was issued. On 11.04.2022, a de-notification was issued, withdrawing the acquisition. The present writ petitions were filed challenging the de-notification and seeking compensation.
Acts & Sections
- Karnataka Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956: 3, 17, 20
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227, 300-A
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894: 17(1), 17(3-A), 11-A, 48
