Bengaluru: In a big relief for Bangalore Development Authority (BDA), the Karnataka high court on Thursday upheld the validity of both the preliminary and final notifications it had issued with regard to Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout, holding that the land acquisition for the layout was just and proper.
On July 11, 2014, a single-judge bench had quashed the acquisition notifications, saying it is shocking the state govt had approved the scheme on April 2, 2008, before the preliminary notification and hearing the land losers.In the absence of approval of the final scheme, BDA couldn’t have authorised its land acquisition officer to proceed with the acquisition for the mega project, the bench said. This order was challenged by the civic authority. Appearing for BDA, senior advocate Gurudas S Kannur submitted that the BDA need not take approval of the state in the initial stages and the entire expenditure was that of the authority. More than 2,700 acres of land had already been acquired, and 26,918 sites were formed on 2,208 acres and allotted to the general public.
After perusing the material on record and the submissions, a division bench comprising Chief Justice PS Dinesh Kumar and Justice CM Poonacha pointed out that as per Section 15 of the BDA Act and the judgment in the case of Junjamma and others, as well as the fact that in a GO dated February 16, 2010, a specific condition was laid out that the BDA would bear the entire expenses of the project out of its resources, prior approval need not have been taken by the authority. “Merely because the BDA has taken the approval of the govt, it can’t be said the same is ‘out of place and premature’. Hence, the said finding recorded by the single bench is erroneous and liable to be interfered with,” the division bench observed.
“Undisputedly, the lands have been acquired in public interest for the purpose of formation of a layout to satisfy the housing needs of the general public…,” the bench further noted.
On July 11, 2014, a single-judge bench had quashed the acquisition notifications, saying it is shocking the state govt had approved the scheme on April 2, 2008, before the preliminary notification and hearing the land losers.In the absence of approval of the final scheme, BDA couldn’t have authorised its land acquisition officer to proceed with the acquisition for the mega project, the bench said. This order was challenged by the civic authority. Appearing for BDA, senior advocate Gurudas S Kannur submitted that the BDA need not take approval of the state in the initial stages and the entire expenditure was that of the authority. More than 2,700 acres of land had already been acquired, and 26,918 sites were formed on 2,208 acres and allotted to the general public.
After perusing the material on record and the submissions, a division bench comprising Chief Justice PS Dinesh Kumar and Justice CM Poonacha pointed out that as per Section 15 of the BDA Act and the judgment in the case of Junjamma and others, as well as the fact that in a GO dated February 16, 2010, a specific condition was laid out that the BDA would bear the entire expenses of the project out of its resources, prior approval need not have been taken by the authority. “Merely because the BDA has taken the approval of the govt, it can’t be said the same is ‘out of place and premature’. Hence, the said finding recorded by the single bench is erroneous and liable to be interfered with,” the division bench observed.
“Undisputedly, the lands have been acquired in public interest for the purpose of formation of a layout to satisfy the housing needs of the general public…,” the bench further noted.