S.B. Sreenivasarao and Another vs Government of Karnataka and Another

B.S. Patil, J.—Petitioners are challenging the communication dated 18-2-2009 issued by the 2nd respondent informing them that their lands are being acquired resorting to the urgency clause provided u/s 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the purpose of forming underground drainage in Shikaripura Town.

In the impugned communication-Annexure-A, reference is made to Section 4(1) Notification dated 10-11-2008. As the petitioners expressed apprehension through their learned Counsel that they are likely to be dispossessed, notice was ordered to the respondents.

Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submits that the final declaration is not yet issued. In these circumstances, it is clear that the petitions filed are premature, as the challenge has to be against the final declaration, if and when the same is issued. Merely because the respondent-Housing Board has resorted to the provisions of Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, petitioners cannot approach this Court without challenging the notification issued u/s 6 of the Land Acquisition Act. Hence, reserving liberty to the petitioners to approach this Court soon after the final declaration is issued, these writ petitions are dismissed without expressing any opinion on the merits.