Nagaraja S. vs National High Way of Authority of India and Others

D.H. Waghela, C.J.—The appellant, the original petitioner before learned Single Judge of this court, has insisted upon appearing as party-in-person and argued his own case. He seeks to challenge the order dated 20.3.2013 in Writ Petition No. 49425/2012 on various contradictory statements of his own. He was therefore requested to submit his arguments in writing. However he insisted upon dwelling on multiple issues without focusing on the bare facts. There is no dispute about the fact that the process of acquisition of the land of the appellant has already undergone four judicial proceedings in the form of Writ Petition No. 40924/2010 disposed on 27.1.2012, Writ Petition No. 33021/2012 disposed on 13.2.2013, CCC. No. 296 of 2012 disposed on 13.2.2012 and the original proceeding herein in the form of Writ Petition No. 49425/2012 disposed by the impugned order. There is also no dispute about the facts, summarized in the impugned order, to the effect that the petitioner was the owner of 9 guntas of land comprised in S. No. 184P of Oorukere Village in Tumkur Taluk, which was the subject matter of acquisition by the National Highways Authority and preliminary notification in that regard was issued on 3.11.2000. At that time, it was proposed to acquire 6 guntas of land and final notification was issued on 11.9.2011. Subsequently, another piece of land measuring 2 guntas in the same survey number was purchased by Respondent No. 1 from the petitioner by a registered sale deed dated 3.11.2006. Thus, after acquisition of 8 guntas of land out of 9 guntas of land owned by the appellant, acquisition of the remaining 1 gunta of land remained incomplete, particularly in view of the assertion by the appellant that remaining 1 gunta of land was also possessed, taken over and put to use by the respondent. It was in this context that the impugned order recorded that the respondent had issued preliminary notification dated 17.8.2012 proposing to acquire the remaining 1 gunta of land. The petitioner had already filed his objections and vide order dated 31.12.2012, the Special Land Acquisition Officer has over-ruled the objections. Therefore, it was contended by Respondent No. 1 that final notification was to be issued shortly and necessary action was to be taken to make an award. The grievance voiced by the appellant was to the effect that, without paying damages for illegal occupation of 1 gunta for the past 20 years, the respondent could not proceed with the acquisition proceeding.

After adverting to the record and various orders made in the proceedings initiated by the appellant, it is recorded in the impugned order that the respondent-authority is bound to pay damages for use and occupation of 1 gunta of land without acquiring the same. It is also observed that the respondent-authority would be under legal obligation to acquire the land, pass an award and pay compensation including the amount duly assessed towards use and occupation of the land from the date the possession was taken. Accordingly, with such observations in favour of the appellant, direction has been issued in the impugned order to make an award within an outer limit of three months from the date of issue of final notification u/s 3-D of the National Highways Act, 1956.

In spite of favourable observations and order of learned Single Judge, the appellant has time and again argued his own case on various different versions and upon being asked to submit a concise statement of his submissions, he has contended in writing that all the earlier proceedings for acquisition of the land other than remaining 1 gunta of land has to be struck down and the respondents have to pay cost for the earlier use and occupation by the respondent to the entire extent of 9 guntas which is said to be in question. On such basis, he has made a claim of Rs. 3,92,04,000/-, which clearly discloses a greed-based abuse of the process of this court by challenging an order entirely in favour of the himself. Therefore, the appeal as well as the applications made therein are summarily dismissed with cost quantified at Rs. 10,000/- which the appellant shall pay to the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority within a period of 15 days.