Blurb
The High Court has upheld the land acquisition process carried out near Nelamangala for road development and related public purposes.
CH NEWS
BENGALURU
The Karnataka High Court has upheld the acquisition of nearly 30 acres of land in Jakkasandra village near Nelamangala, setting aside a single-judge bench order that had quashed the acquisition and directed restoration of the land to its original owners.
A division bench comprising Justices D.K. Singh and S. Rachaiah allowed appeals filed by the state government and the Sri Prasanna Anjaneya Trust, which had challenged the single-judge verdict delivered nearly 14 years ago.
The dispute relates to land acquired in 1987 along the Bengaluru-Honnavar road corridor for a scheme involving the trust. The bench observed that before the government approved the acquisition proposal on October 9, 1986, the landowners had executed sale agreements, received the full consideration amount and handed over possession of the land.
The court further noted that the acquisition process was challenged almost two decades after the issuance of the final notification, making the challenge highly belated. In such circumstances, the bench held that the objections raised by the appellants could not be sustained.
According to records placed before the court, the acquired land was handed over to the Sri Prasanna Anjaneya Trust with a condition that 150 residential sites measuring around 30×40 feet be allotted to members of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe communities. The remaining sites were to be distributed among members of the trust.
The final acquisition notification was issued in 1987. However, several landowners approached the High Court between 2006 and 2008 questioning the legality of the acquisition.
A single-judge bench had subsequently quashed the acquisition proceedings, observing that there was no legal provision permitting land acquisition for the benefit of a private institution in the manner adopted in the case. The court also directed that the land be returned to the original owners.
Challenging that decision, the state government and the trust argued before the division bench that the acquisition had been completed decades earlier and that substantial development had already taken place on the land.
BOX
During the hearing, counsel for the appellants contended that the trust had paid the full acquisition cost and that numerous beneficiaries had constructed houses and lived on the sites with their families for several decades. They argued that cancelling the acquisition after such a long lapse of time would adversely affect settled rights and create uncertainty for hundreds of residents. The division bench accepted these submissions and restored the acquisition proceedings.