MARGHA BAI PACHAN PATEL Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition, petitioner has sought for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash annexure H and J the orders dated 21-12-2000 and 30-5-2001 respectively.

(2.) PETITIONER is said to be the owner of land in Sy. No. 71 at Doddathogur village, Begur hobli, Bangalore South Taluk measuring 9. 35 acres and out of which the petitioner is said to be the absolute owner in possession of enjoyment of the land to the extent of 6. 23 acres. According to the petitioner, she has purchased the above property under two different sale deeds - on 16-6-1990 from one Smt. Jayamma and her four daughters to the extent of 3. 11 acres under Annexure A and another 3. 12 acres from one Krishnappa, his mother and three brothers under annexure A1. The name of the petitioner is said to have been entered in the RTC and also in the mutation register as per annexure C. An area of 3. 00 acres in Sy. No. 71 was converted for industrial purpose on 4-2-2000 as per annexure D and the remaining area in possession of the petitioner to an extent of 3. 23 acres, was also got converted for industrial purpose by order dated 13-6-2001 of the Deputy Commissioner at annexure Dl. It is stated in the petition that that there are in all thirty members in the joint family of the petitioner including children and grandchildren and after getting the land converted they have established two plywood factories and also one MMT Digital printing Multi National Company and they have also put up more than 50,000 sq. ft. RCC building in respect of MMT India Ltd. and also 30,000 sq. ft. were utilised for putting up vikas Board Industry and another 30,000 sq. ft. is utilised for Vimal Veneers after obtaining permission from the Panchayat and various other authorities.

(3.) THE main grievance of the petitioner is the area to the extent of 3. 23 acres in respect of which she has subsequently obtained an order of conversion by order dated 13-6-2001 whereas this respondent KIADB has notified for acquisition on 21-12-2000 as per annexure H and also the final notification was issued on 30-5-2001 at annexure J. The specific case of the petitioner is that, no notice was served on the petitioner or any member of the family who are in actual possession of the property in question. She came to know about the preliminary and final notification only in the month of June regarding the proposed acquisition and she filed detailed objection on 26-6-2001 as per annexure K.