Karnataka HC quashes acquisition of land for Anekal APMC market yard | Bengaluru News

BENGALURU: In a big relief for a group of landowners, the Karnataka high court has quashed the acquisition of their lands at Goolimangala Village in Anekal Taluk holding that the acquisition proceedings have lapsed on account of non-adherence to the timeline.
Their lands were sought to be acquired for setting up of an APMC market yard and the preliminary notification was issued on May 20, 2002 and the final notification was issued on August 2, 2003.
However, the award was finally passed on January 7, 2021 which was challenged by M Suresh Kumar and others citing delay.
Allowing their petitions, justice Suraj Govindaraj pointed out that there has been inordinate delay in passing of the award.
The judge also noted that even though ultimately the Supreme Court disposed of the petitions on April 17, 2017 itself, no award was passed within 12 months thereafter and the process of approval of the award commenced only on November 20, 2018 which is much beyond the period prescribed under the new land acquisition act.
“The timelines which have been prescribed under the Land Acquisition Act are clear and it is for the State
and/or SLAO to adhere to such timelines without default. If there is a default, the acquisition would have to be struck down as lapsed since the interest of the land loser would suffer on account of state or SLAO not discharging its functions in a time bound manner,” the judge further observed in his order.
Dwelling further,the judge has added that beneficiary cannot on the basis of its interest being harmed contend that the acquisition is required to be saved and/or that on account of default by the State or SLAO, the beneficiary cannot be deprived of usufructs of the acquisition.
“The beneficiary cannot claim that if there is delay in acquisition by the State and/or SLAO, the acquisition needs to be upheld to protect the interest of the beneficiary,” the judge said while refusing to accept the argument advanced by the APMC, the beneficiary in this case.

Source link

Leave a Comment