Right To Relief Lost: Karnataka High Court Dismisses Plea Filed After 44 Yrs Challenging Land Acquisition Proceedings From 1978
Observing that “Forty four years is too long a time to maintain legal action. With passage of such protracted time, the right to relief is lost,” the Karnataka High Court dismissed an appeal filed by an appellant questioning the land acquisition proceedings initiated and completed in the year 1978.A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind dismissed the appeal...
Observing that “Forty four years is too long a time to maintain legal action. With passage of such protracted time, the right to relief is lost,” the Karnataka High Court dismissed an appeal filed by an appellant questioning the land acquisition proceedings initiated and completed in the year 1978.
A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind dismissed the appeal filed by Vinod Kumar K. The appellant had challenged a single judge bench order dismissing his petition praying to call for records pertaining to the proceedings initiated by the Special Land Acquisition officer. Further, direct the authorities to initiate proceedings and pass an award under Section 11 of the Right to Fair, Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
The single judge bench had dismissed the petition on the grounds of delay as the petition was filed after forty-four years and the same was unexplained. On the query made by the bench regarding the inordinate delay, the counsel contended that the petitioner for the first time in the last week of December 2018 came to know that the compensation was not paid.
On going through the record the court said, “The jurisdictional Article 226 of the Constitution is not liable to be exercised to entertain the stale and a virtually dead claim.”
However, the court granted liberty to the appellant to make a representation to the competent authority-respondent in regards to seeking compensation and the authority was directed to examine the said aspect and take an appropriate decision in accordance with the law.
Appearance: Advocate D N Manjunath for Appellant
AGA Niloufer Akbar for R1.
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 317
Case Title: Vinod Kumar K AND State of Karnataka & Others
Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 325 OF 2024