1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BENCH

DATED THIS THE 21 ST FEBRUARY, 2017

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L.NARAYANA SWAMY

WRIT PETITION NOS.106018-106025/2016 (LA-RES)

BETWEEN

1. FRANCIS REMEND RODRIGUS, AGE 53 YEARS, R/O "INFANT JESUS VILLA" N.H.17, KASARAGOD VILLAGE, HONNAVAR TALUK, DISTRICT: UTTARA . 581342

2. SRI MARTIN S/O REMEND RODRIGUS, AGE: 53 YEARS, R/O "INFANT JESUS VILLA" N.H.17, KASARAGOD VILLAGE, HONNAVAR TALUK, DISTRICT: . 581342

3. SMT.MARIA SILVESTOR NAZARATH, AGE: 53 YEARS, R/O "NEW STAR" HIREMATH, KASARAGOD VILLAGE, HONNAVAR TALUK, DISTRICT: UTTARA KANNADA.581342

4. SRI CHANDRUI BIKKU MESTA, AGE: 59 YEARS, R/O HIREMATH, KASARAGOD VILLAGE, HONNAVAR TALUK, DISTRICT: UTTARA KANNADA.581342 2

5. PARAMESHWAR RAWLU KARVI, AGE: 45 YEARS, R/O HOUSE NO.810, HIREMATH, KASARAGOD VILLAGE, HONNAVAR TALUK, DISTRICT: UTTARA KANNADA.581342

6. ROHINI W/O SOMU TANDELA, AGE: 45 YEARS, R/O 828B, HIREMATH, KASARAGOD VILLAGE, HONNAVAR TALUK, DISTRICT: UTTARA KANNADA.581342

7. DURGAPPA BIKKU MESTA, AGE: 51 YEARS, R/O 829, HIREMATH, KASARAGOD VILLAGE, HONNAVAR TALUK, DISTRICT: UTTARA KANNADA.581342

8. SRI.NATOLIN FRANCIS DSOZA, AGE: 65 YEARS, R/O 811, HIREMATH, KASARAGOD VILLAGE, HONNAVAR TALUK, DISTRICT: UTTARA KANNADA.581342

... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI J S SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND

1. COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, NO.13-1-17E, NEAR P.W.D OFFICE, CHENNAMMA ROAD, AJJARAKAD, UDUPI-576101

2. NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, NO.13-1-17E, PRATAM RESIDENCY, PANDUBETTU, UDUPI-MALPE MAIN ROAD, AMBALAPADI POST, UDUPI-576103 BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 3

3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT, KARWAR.

4. THE PORT OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF FORT AND INLAND WATER, HONNAVAR, HONNAVAR TALUK, DISTRICT: UTTARA KANNADA.

5. STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FORT AND INLAND WATER, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALOORU.

6. UNION OF INDIA, BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HIGHWAYS, NEW DELHI.

... RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT.K VIDYAVATHI, AGA FOR R-3, 4 & 5; SRI SHIVASAI M PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 & 2 SRI M T BANGI, ADVOCATE FOR R-6)

THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DATED:27.06.2016 AND 13.07.2016, ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS NO.1 TO 7, THE COPIES OF WHICH HAVE BEEN PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A, A1 TO A6 AND ANNEXURE-B, B1 TO B6 RESPECTIVELY AND ETC.

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR HEARING- INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: 4

ORDER

Petitioners submitted that land in question has been acquired by the respondents by publishing proper notification in the year 1956. Thereafter the respondents neither taken possession nor paid the compensation to the petitioners. Even today they are in possession of the property. Under these circumstances, without examining the case, the respondents have issued Annexure-A notices in which the petitioners are directed to vacate the land within a period of 07 days and failing which they will take possession with the help of the police.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that respondents only initiated acquisition proceedings.

Acquisition proceedings has not been concluded in the meanwhile new Land Acquisition Act came into force regulating the acquisition. Under these circumstances,

Annexure-A is bad in law. Hence, the same is to be set aside. 5

3. Learned counsel for the respondents filed statement of objections. It is the submission of the learned counsel that the acquisition initiated in the year

1966, compensation has been paid, both the petitioners and the owners have received the compensation and possession has been handed over. Even thereafter these petitioners have re-entered and their re-entry is nothing but the encroachment of the land belonging to the government and the revenue record issued in which the respondents establishment has been entered. Under these circumstances, these petitions are to be dismissed and also it is submitted that the prayer made for consideration of the representation shall be done in accordance with law.

4. Heard both learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused petition papers.

5. Annexure-A notices have been issued in the month of June 2016 directing the petitioners to vacate 6

and hand over the possession within 07 days from the date of receipt of said notice. Further it is said that police help would be taken to evict the petitioners from the land of the respondents. This 07 days has expired long back. It is also not taken possession by using police force. It may be for the reason of granting an interim order by this Court. Under these circumstances, for all purposes Annexure-A becomes infructuous since almost year ago these notices have been issued. Under these circumstances, instead of keeping these petitions pending, I am inclined to dispose of these petitions considering the second prayer of the petitioners to consider the representations Annexure-C series within a stipulated period.

6. The respondents are directed to consider the representations Annexure-C series dated 01.07.2016 and pass appropriate order within three months from thereafter. The petitioners have got any additional 7

documents or claim they are at liberty to produce by making additional representation also. If representation is made within two weeks then the respondents have to consider the representation Annexure-C series within three months from thereafter. Till disposal of the said representation, the respondents are directed not to give effect to Annexure-A notices.

7. The respondents if it is required to issue a suitable notice for appearance.

With these observations, the writ petitions stand disposed.

Sd/- JUDGE

CLK