Case Note & Summary
The appellants, the Housing Commissioner and Special Land Acquisition Officer of the Karnataka Housing Board, filed a writ appeal challenging the order of a learned Single Judge dated 29-05-2012 in W.P.No.38086/2002. The Single Judge had allowed the writ petition filed by respondent No.2, T. Narayana Reddy, and quashed the acquisition proceedings initiated under Section 33(2) of the Karnataka Housing Board Act, 1962 read with the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on the ground that the scheme, which is a pre-requisite for acquisition, was neither framed nor finalized by the Board nor sanctioned by the State Government. The Division Bench, after hearing the parties, examined the records and found that the scheme was in fact framed by the Board and sanctioned by the State Government on 20-12-1991, prior to the preliminary notification under Section 33(2) dated 27-02-1992. The court noted that the Single Judge had not considered this material fact. The Division Bench held that the acquisition proceedings were valid and set aside the order of the Single Judge, allowing the writ appeal. The court directed that the acquisition proceedings shall continue in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Scheme Sanction - Pre-requisite for Acquisition - Sections 20, 21, 33(2) of Karnataka Housing Board Act, 1962 read with Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - The Single Judge quashed acquisition proceedings on the ground that no scheme was framed or sanctioned before acquisition. The Division Bench held that the scheme was framed and sanctioned by the State Government on 20-12-1991, prior to the preliminary notification under Section 33(2) dated 27-02-1992. Therefore, the acquisition proceedings are valid and the order of the Single Judge is set aside. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquisition proceedings initiated under Section 33(2) of the Karnataka Housing Board Act read with the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, are valid when the scheme under Sections 20 and 21 of the KHB Act was framed and sanctioned prior to the acquisition notification.
Final Decision
The writ appeal is allowed. The order of the learned Single Judge dated 29-05-2012 in W.P.No.38086/2002 is set aside. The acquisition proceedings shall continue in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Land Acquisition
- Scheme Sanction
- Pre-requisite for Acquisition
- Sections 20
- 21
- 33(2) of Karnataka Housing Board Act
- Land Acquisition Act 1894
Case Details
2015 LawText (KAR) (06) 25
W.A.No. 3464 of 2012 (LA-KHB)
N.K.Patil, B.Sreenivase Gowda
Sri. Basavaraj V. Sabarad for appellants; Sri. T.K. Vedamurthy, HCGP for R.1; Sri. S.M. Chandrashekar, Sr. Counsel for Sri. Anil Kumar, Advocate for R.2
The Housing Commissioner, Karnataka Housing Board, and The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Karnataka Housing Board
The State of Karnataka and T. Narayana Reddy
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ appeal against order of Single Judge quashing land acquisition proceedings initiated under Section 33(2) of Karnataka Housing Board Act read with Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Remedy Sought
Appellants sought setting aside of the Single Judge's order dated 29-05-2012 in W.P.No.38086/2002.
Filing Reason
The Single Judge quashed acquisition proceedings on the ground that no scheme was framed or sanctioned before acquisition.
Previous Decisions
Single Judge allowed W.P.No.38086/2002 on 29-05-2012, quashing acquisition proceedings.
Issues
Whether the scheme under Sections 20 and 21 of the Karnataka Housing Board Act was framed and sanctioned prior to the acquisition notification under Section 33(2)?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellants argued that the scheme was framed and sanctioned by the State Government on 20-12-1991, prior to the preliminary notification dated 27-02-1992.
Respondent No.2 contended that no scheme was framed or sanctioned, as held by the Single Judge.
Ratio Decidendi
The scheme under Sections 20 and 21 of the Karnataka Housing Board Act is a pre-requisite for acquisition under Section 33(2). In this case, the scheme was framed by the Board and sanctioned by the State Government on 20-12-1991, prior to the preliminary notification dated 27-02-1992. Therefore, the acquisition proceedings are valid and the Single Judge's order quashing them was erroneous.
Judgment Excerpts
The learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition and quashed the acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 mainly on the ground that the scheme which is pre-requisite for going ahead with the acquisition under Sec. 33(2) of the Karnataka Housing Board Act with the provisions of the L.A. Act, 1894, is neither framed nor finalized by the Karnataka Housing Board; much less it is sanctioned by the State Government before going ahead with the project as required under the provisions of Secs. 20 and 21 of the KHB Act.
The scheme was framed by the Board and sanctioned by the State Government on 20-12-1991, prior to the preliminary notification under Section 33(2) dated 27-02-1992.
Procedural History
The respondent No.2 filed W.P.No.38086/2002 challenging the acquisition proceedings. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition on 29-05-2012, quashing the acquisition. The appellants filed this writ appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, challenging that order. The appeal was reserved for judgment and delivered on 12-06-2015.
Acts & Sections
- Karnataka Housing Board Act, 1962: 20, 21, 33(2)
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894:
- Karnataka High Court Act, 1961: 4
