M.Venkatesh vs State of Karnataka and Bangalore Development Authority

Ashok B. Hinchigeri

The petitioner''s grievance is that 30 sites measuring 40'' x 60'' as the compensation for the compulsory acquisition of the lands for the formation of RMV II Stage layout, are not allotted to him. Sri M.Ramakrishna, the Learned Counsel appearing for M/s.M.T.Nanaiah Associates for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a GPA holder of the owners of the lands at Sy. No. 10/6, 10/8, 10/9, 10/10 and 11/11 of Geddalahalli, Bangalore North Taluk. He submits that heitherto the respondent No. 2 has allotted only 31/2 sites to the petitioner. He prays for a direction to the respondents to allot the remaining 261/2 sites.

The Learned Counsel brings to my notice I.A.1/12 for amendment of the cause title for arraigning the 11 owners of the properties in question as parties.

Sri K.Krishna, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent No. 1 submits that the petitioner has not produced the GPA document. He submits that the petitioner has no surviving grievance, inasmuch as the lands acquired from him measures one acre and he is already given 31/2 sites.

Sri Gurudev Gachchinamath, the Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2 submits that the petitioner''s claim appears to be based on a fabricated power of attorney. He submits that as a matter of fact, the petitioner is liable to return 21/2 sites to the respondent No. 2.

I.A.1/12 is not accompanied by the GPA document. The I.A. does not even state as to whether the eleven parties are to be arraigned as co-petitioners or respondents. The provisions invoked are Order VI Rule 17 of CPC and not even Order I Rule 10 of CPC. For all these reasons, I disallow I.A.1/12. It is also worthwhile to notice the contents of paragraph No. 5 of the affidavit filed in support of I.A.1/12.

I submit that some of the land owners who had given power of attorney to me have expired and the liberty may be granted for LR to come on record either in this writ petition or to prosecute independently kept open their right to work out remedy to available the benefits offered by the State/1st respondent.

While disposing I.A.1/12, I make it very clear that the liberty is reserved to the land losers of the lands at Sy. No. 10/6, 10/8, 10/9, 10/10 and 11/11 of Geddalahalli to seek ventilation of their grievances by initiating the appropriate proceedings.

I do not propose to deliver any finding on the allegation that the petitioner''s claims are based on the fabricated GPA document. The issue can be resolved only after holding the trial by the competent civil court.

Further, I also do not propose to go into the claims of the petitioner''s entitlement to 30 sites based on the power of attorney document and the denial of the respondents that the petitioner is entitled only to one site. But it is the Court''s anxiety that, if a party has surrendered the lands without receiving the full compensation and has not sought the enhancement thereof, the Bangalore Development Authority is obliged to allot the sites as per the settlement stated to have been entered into between the Bangalore Development Authority and the land owners in the SLP proceedings before the Apex Court.

What can be unmistakably said is that the land losers are entitled to one site measuring 60'' x 40'' for every one acre of land they have lost. It is for the respondent No. 2 to ascertain and identify from whom the lands are acquired and to whom the sites are to be given. In this fact-finding exercise, it may also ascertain whether the petitioner is a duly constituted power of attorney holder. If the respondent No. 2 finds that the matter involves complicated questions of title, the adjudication has to be only by the competent civil court.

For the purpose of disposing of these petitions suffice to notice that the petitioner has lost one acre of land on account of compulsory acquisition of the lands and has received the allotment of 31/2 sites, partly in his capacity as a land-loser and partly as a power of attorney-holder of other land-losers. These petitions are accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs.