- (1.) C. A. Nos. 5699, 5705, 6420-21, 5706, 5708 of 1998 : Respondents land owners challenged the Notification dated 29th March, 1986 issued under sub-section (1) of Section 4 and the Notification dated 4-5-1987 issued under sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for acquisition of lands for a Co-operative Housing Society by filing Writ Petitions Nos. 7837, 8113 and 8958 of 1987 before the High Court of Karnataka. By judgment and order dated 14-11-1995, the learned single Judge dismissed the said writ petitions. Against the said judgment and order, Writ Appeals Nos. 95 and 4630 of 1995 were preferred by the landowners and Writ Appeal No. 75 of 1995 was filed by the Kanaka Gruha Nirmana Sahakara Sangha (the Group Housing Society) which was impleaded as a party - respondent in writ petitions. The Division Bench of the High Court allowed the writ appeals Nos. 95 and 4630 of 1995 and quashed the notification under sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Act and also all consequential proceedings relating to the acquisition of the land subject to the writ petitioners' depositing the amount of compensation received by them along with interest calculated @ 15% per annum from the date of payment of amount. Writ Appeal No. 75 of 1995 filed by the Society was dismissed.
(2.) The Court also held that no writ appeal was filed by the land owners who had filed Writ Petition No. 8958/87 and they have acquiesced in the action of the State Government and were satisfied with the compensation. Hence, the judgment would not confer any right upon the said writ petitioners to reopen the case or re-agitate the matter by way of appeal or any other proceedings.
(3.) The Court allowed the writ appeals on the ground - (a) the initiation of action by the Special Deputy Commissioner under Section 4 of the Act for issuing notification is illegal as under the Land Acquisition Act, the appropriate Government is required to be satisfied that the land is needed for public purpose; (b) respondents have also not placed on record any document to show that prior approval in terms of Section 3 (f) (vi) was granted by the Government and Annexure R-1 cannot be deemed to be substitute of the powers required to be exercised under Section 3 (f)(vi) and sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Act. Hence, these appeals.;