Govt Can't Act As A Robber, Taking Away Private Land Without Compensation Militates Against Constitutional Guarantees: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court has expressed deep anguish over the actions of Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) and its officials who for almost 15 years failed to pay compensation to landowners whose properties were acquired for public purpose in 2007. Justice Krishna S Dixit, while partly allowing the petition filed by one M V Guruprasad, said, “The government cannot...
The Karnataka High Court has expressed deep anguish over the actions of Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) and its officials who for almost 15 years failed to pay compensation to landowners whose properties were acquired for public purpose in 2007.
Justice Krishna S Dixit, while partly allowing the petition filed by one M V Guruprasad, said, “The government cannot act as a robber of citizen’s lands.”
“Taking away private lands for the purported public purpose sans compensation militates against the spirit of constitutional guarantee enacted u/a 300A, the fundamental right to property no longer being on the statute book, notwithstanding,” it added
The court also said that State and its instrumentalities are constitutionally expected to conduct themselves with fairness & reasonableness in all their actions.
The petitioners had approached the court against the acquisition of land done vide Preliminary Notification dated 09.01.2007, followed by the Final Notification dated 17.05.2007 issued under provisions of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966.
The authority opposed the plea saying that acquisition having been completed by issuance of Final Notification on 17.05.2007, the lands have vested in the State and therefore, the same cannot be restored to petitioners.
"After the land owners notified the change of khatha pursuant to subject sale deeds, the Government had issued a Corrigendum Notification on 05.06.2014 mentioning their names and because of the protocol process, there is some delay and now the payment of compensation will be made," the State said.
The bench noted that on the date of Preliminary Notification, names of the Petitioners had not figured as khatedars in the Revenue Records and therefore, the KIADB was justified in notifying the acquisition in the names of their vendors, who were the Khatedars.
It further said that petitioners by representation dated 09.01.2013 had requested the KIADB for payment of the compensation for having taken their lands and had also sent the reminder dated 01.07.2014 & 03.07.2014.
"In fact, the Government issued a Corrigendum Notification dated 05.06.2014 mentioning their names and thereby entitling them to payment of compensation. However, compensation has not been paid even to this day. There is no plausible explanation as to why the payment of compensation is withheld for decade and a half. It hardly needs to be stated that payment of compensation is essential when private property is acquired for public purpose," it added.
Noting that the petitioner’s property has vested in the State vide Final Notification dated 17.05.2007, the bench said, “KIADB ought to have woken up and arranged for payment of the payment of compensation. However, strangely it has filed its Statement of Objections seeking dismissal of the petition contending that they have already developed the land and allotted the same to several entrepreneurs.”
Further noting that in the entire Statement of Objections, neither the State nor the KIADB has said anything about the compensation being payable to the Petitioners, the bench said such a conduct reinforces the "shackles of a feudalistic attitude, from which the transformative character of our constitution seeks to liberate.”
“Their action in not paying the compensation is not only grossly violative of property rights constitutionally guaranteed under Article 300A but gnaws at overarching objectives of a Welfare State ordained under the Constitution," said the court.
Observing that this court cannot deny justice that is eminently due to the aggrieved citizens by quoting some constitutional theories, the bench said: “The petitioners be paid at least 50% of the compensation to be computed under provisions of the 2013 Act, (Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act), along with solatium, interest & such other things.”
It clarified that in special circumstances of the case and because of the stay of a Coordinate Bench decision in a case wherein the court has directed payment of compensation under the 2013 Act, "The provisions of the 2013 Act are taken only for the purpose of determining/re-fixing the compensation amount on a normative basis till after & subject to decision in the Writ Appeal."
It added: “Writ Courts being the custodians of Constitutional Rights of the citizens, have to individualise justice taking into account the facts & circumstances of the case at hand.”
Case Title: M V Guruprasad & ANR And State of Karnataka
Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 61426 OF 2016
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 55
Date of order: 10-02-2023
Appearance: Advocate Veeranna G Tigadi for petitioners.
Advocate Sridhar Hegde for R1
Advocate P V Chandrashekar for R2 to R4.