Research › Browse › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

1987 DIGILAW 163 (KAR)

M. HANUMANTHAPPA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

1987-06-23

MURALIDHARA RAO

body1987
MURFIDHER RAO, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner is the owner in possession and enjoyment of land bearing s. No. 144, measuring 1 acre 18 guntas, 116/1 measuring 1 acre 7 guntas and S. No. 117 measuring 1 acre 6 guntas situated at Kadugondanahally, Bangalore north Taluk, Bangalore District. In the schedule to the petition, the petitioner has also mentioned a residential construction and a touring talkies. ( 2 ) THE petitioner has challenged the acquisition of the aforesaid lands by the bangalore Development Authority ('the b. D. A/ in short) under the preliminary notification dated 29th May 1978 published in the Karnataka Gazette dated 21st september 1978 (Annexure-C) and Final notification dated 27th February, 1985 published in the Karnataka Gazette on the 6th June 1985 (Annexure-D), ( 3 ) MR. P. Krishnappa, learned counsel for the petitioner has raised two contentions. He firstly contended that there is inordinate delay in issuing final notification under Section 19 of the b. D. A. Act and that by itself vitiates the proceedings, ( 4 ) NO period is specified in the b. D. A. Act unlike Section 6 of the Land acquisition Act, Though there has been delay of seven years between the preliminary notification and the final declaration, in the absence of statutory provision in that regard, in the Act, it is not possible to accept the contention. Hence i reject this contention. ( 5 ) THE second contention of Sri krishnappa was that even though final declaration was published on 6th June 1985, no award has been passed till today and therefore, the entire acquisition lapses. To substantiate this contention, learned counsel relied upon the provisions of Section 11 (A) of the Land Acquisition act. Section 11a has been inserted by act No. 68 of 1984 in the Land Acquisition act. The said provision reads thus :"the Collector shall make an award under Section 11 within a period of two years from the date of the publication of the declaration and if no award is made within that period, the entire-proceedings for the acquisition of the land shall lapse. " (emphasis supplied) it is contended by the learned counsel that in the instant case final notification was published on 6th June 1985 and therefore, the period of two years expired on 6th June 1987 and since according to the petitioner no award has been passed, the acquisition lapses. " (emphasis supplied) it is contended by the learned counsel that in the instant case final notification was published on 6th June 1985 and therefore, the period of two years expired on 6th June 1987 and since according to the petitioner no award has been passed, the acquisition lapses. ( 6 ) THE word 'publication of Declaration' in the above provision should be understood in the context of the explanation given in sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act. In the said sub-section it is stated that the last date of such publication and the giving of such public notice being hereinafter referred to as the "date of' publication" of the declaration. Under sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Land Acquisition act, in addition to the publication of declaration in the official gazette, it is required to be published in two daily news papers having circulation in the locality in which the land is situate of which at least one shall be in the regional language and in addition, the Collector shall cause public notice of the substance of such declaration to be given at convenient places in the said locality. It is the last of such dates that is treated as 'publication of declaration'. In other words, it is not the publication of the declaration in the official gazette that is to be reckoned for purpose of calculating two years in Section 11-A of the Land acquisition Act. That it is so, is obvious from a similar provision in Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act wherein, the section itself has given the connotation to the words "publication of Notification". Section 4 (1) provides three modes of publication i. e. . Gazette Publication, publication in News Papers having circulation in locality and lastly personal service. It is the last of these dates that is treated as publication of Notification. Hence both in the Preliminary Notification under Section 4 and Final Notification under Section 6, to determine the date of publication, the same criteria is adopted. That is how the expression has to be understood in Section 11-A of the land Acquisition Act. ( 7 ) ACQUISITION under the B. D. A. Act is not governed by Sections 4 and b of the Land Acquisition Act. That is how the expression has to be understood in Section 11-A of the land Acquisition Act. ( 7 ) ACQUISITION under the B. D. A. Act is not governed by Sections 4 and b of the Land Acquisition Act. It is well settled that acquisition by the B. D. A. is exclusively governed by Sections 17 and 19 of the B. D. A. Act and not by the provisions of Land Acquisition Act (vide unreported decision in W. P. . 3531/84 and connected cases, decided on 5-4-1984 confirmed in W. A. 1000 of 1984 ). Therefore, the concept of 'publication of declaration" occurring in Section 11-A of the Land Acquisition Act as publication in the Gazette under Section 19 of the b. D. A. Act cannot be accepted. The period of two years under Section 11-A of the Land Acquisition Act is not applicable to acquisition under the BDA Act. Therefore, the said contention cannot be accepted. The acquisition does not lapse. ( 8 ) FOR the foregoing reasons, I do not find any merit in the writ petition. Accordingly it is dismissed. --- *** --- .