D. HANUMANTH SA & ORS. versus STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

Citation: [2010] 12 S.C.R. 1098 · Decided: 27-10-2010 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2010] 12 S.C.R. 1098 
D. HANUMANTH SA & ORS. 
v. 
STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal Nos. 17-20 of 2005 ETC.) 
OCTOBER 27, 2010 
[DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA AND SWATANTER 
KUMAR, JJ.] 
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - ss. 4 and 6 - Issuance of 
C preliminary and final notifications under - Legality and 
Validity of - Issuance of notifications u/ss. 4 and 6 upheld by 
the Division Bench of the High Court - On appeal, held: Land 
was acquired for making approach road as a/so for workshop 
and residential quarters of staff for State Road Transport 
D Corporation, thus, was acquired for public purpose - State 
Government was fully competent to issue such notification -
Land acquired under the said notification not connected with 
the notification issued by State Government for Karnataka 
Industrial Areas Development Board for Infrastructure Corridor 
E Project - Even assuming that the part of the said land stood 
acquired for a different purpose, it is not a proper acquisition 
as the land already stood acquired under a different 
notification issued by separate authority. 
The respondents issued a notification under Section 
F 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and also the 
notification under Section 6 of the Act to acquire land 
admeasuring 3 acres 34 guntas. The appellants 
challenged the legality and the validity of the preliminary 
and final notifications. The Single Judge of the High Court 
G allowed the writ petitions holding that in the proceedings 
prepared by the State Government, the purpose of 
acquisition was stated to have a link road and in the final 
notification under Section 6 of the Act, the purpose of 
H 
1098 
D. HANUMANTH SA & ORS. v. STATE OF 
1099 
KARNATAKA 
acquisition was shown as completely different and, thus, 
A 
quashed the notifications. The Division Bench of the 
High Court set aside the order of the Single Judge 
holding that the acquisition for the land being for a public 
purpose, there was no ambiguity in the notifications 
issued under Section 4 and 6 of the Act. Therefore, the 
B · 
appellants filed the instant appeals. 
Disposing of the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 In the notification dated 14.10.1992, issued 
under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, it is 
C 
specifically stated that the State of Karnataka required 
the land under acquisition for a specific public purpose, 
viz., for the benefit of Karnataka State Road Transport 
Corporation. The part of the notification invoking the 
provisions of Section 17(4), i.e., applying the urgency 
D 
requirement of the Government was set aside by the writ 
court which became final and binding. [Para 9] [1104-E] 
1.2 In the proceedings regarding acquisition of 7 
acres 15 guntas of land, it was stated that in order to meet 
E 
the increasing traffic in the surrounding area of 
Bangalore city, and also with a view to provide better 
transport service to the public, the Government proposed 
F 
to establish a large workshop and city bus depot in the 
said land, and also proposed to undertake establishment 
of residences to workers, training centre and others. In 
order to construct/form the road, the said land is required. 
The said proceedings on careful analysis .would also 
indicate that the land which was sought to ~e acquired 
also figured in a comprehensive plan for construction of 
a road as also workshop and residential building of the 
G 
staff of KSRTC. The State Government reiterated the said 
fact by filing an affidavit. The said reasons and the 
purpose for which the land was sought to be acquired 
·is definitely of a public character and, therefore, the 
respondent-State Government is fully competent to issue 
H 
1100 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2010) 12 S.C.R. 
A such a notification under Section 4 as also under Section 
6 of the Land Acquisition Act. [Paras 10 and 11] [1104-G-
H; 1105-A-D] 
1.3 It is submitted that the Karnataka Industrial Areas 
8 Development Board issued another Notification stating 
that the land as mentioned in the letter dated 16.12.2004 
is being acquired by the Karnataka Industrial Areas 
Development Board. The said land was sought to be 
acquired by issuing notification under the State Act, viz., 
under Section 28 (1) and Section 28(4) of the State Act. A 
C preliminary notification was issued by the Development 
Board, including land admeasuring 39 guntas from 
Survey No. 128/1 and 34 guntas from Survey No. 128/2. 
The said letter itself also indicates that subsequently, a 
final not

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.