- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5314-DB WA No. 100135 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT APPEAL NO. 100135 OF 2017 (LA-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. MAHADEV RAMCHANDRA GODSE, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: 42/43, TANAJI GALLI, BELAGAVI, TAL. AND DIST: BELAGAVI. 2. SRI. MOHAN GOPAL HASBE, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. 28/3, TENGINKERI GALLI, BELAGAVI, TAL. AND DIST: BELAGAVI. 3. SRI. PRASAD SHAMRAO HASABE, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: 18, SAMARTH NAGAR, BELAGAVI, TAL. AND DIST: BELAGAVI. 4. SRI. YOGESH VENKATESH HSABE, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: 220, 2ND GATE, TILAKWADI, BELAGAVI, TAL. AND DIST. BELAGAVI. 5. SMT. RENUKA MARUTI NILAJKAR, AGE: 45 YEAR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: 244/139, FULBAG GALLI, BELAGAVI, TAL. AND DIST. BELAGAVI. 6. MANOHAR MAHADEV HASABE, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: DURGAMATH ROAD, GANDHINAGAR OLD, BELAGAVI, TAL. AND DIST. BELAGAVI. Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5314-DB WA No. 100135 of 2017 7. SRI JOTIBA AMRUT PATIL, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: 4483/1, CHAVAT GALLI, BELAGAVI TAL. AND DIST: BELAGAVI. 8. SRI. SATWAJI RAMCHANDRA HASABE, AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: 714, PADMA COTTAGE, ANAGOL MAIN ROAD, BELAGAVI, TAL. AND DIST: BELAGAVI. 9. SRI. BHAVAKANNA SHAHAPURKAR, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: 1272, RUKMINI NAGAR, SHAHAPURKAR FARM HOUSE, BELAGAVI, TAL. AND DIST. BELAGAVI. 10. SRI. NARAYAN KRISHNAJI KILLEKAR, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: 4428, CHAVAT GALLI, BELAGAVI, TAL. AND DIST. BELAGAVI. 11. SRI. ANANT GOVIND TASILDAR, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: 1272, RUKMINI NAGAR, BELAGAVI, TAL. AND DIST. BELAGAVI. 12. SRI. SHANKAR MARUTI PATIL, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: 4909/46, MAHADWAR ROAD, BELAGAVI, TAL. AND DIST. BELAGAVI. 13. SRI. SANJAY MARUTI PATIL, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: 4909/46, MAHADWAR ROAD, BELAGAVI, TAL. AND DIST. BELAGAVI. 14. SRI. RAJENDRA MARUTI PATIL, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: 4909/46, MAHADWAR ROAD, BELAGAVI, TAL. AND DIST. BELAGAVI. 15. SRI. SHRINATH RAMCHANDRA PATIL, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: 4909/46, MAHADWAR ROAD, BELAGAVI, TAL. AND DIST. BELAGAVI. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5314-DB WA No. 100135 of 2017 16. SRI. SUHAS SHIVAJIRAO PATIL, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: 269/B, AGARKAR ROAD, TIKLAKWADI, BELAGAVI, TAL. AND DIST. BELAGAVI. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI D. RAVIKUMAR GOKAKAR, ADVOCATE.) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TO THE DEPT. OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT M.S. BLDG., BENGALURU-1. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BELAGAVI, SUB-DIVISION, BELAGAVI, TAL. AND DIST. BELAGAVI. 3. THE KARNATAKA URBAN WATER SUPPLY AND DRAINAGE BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, VISHWESHWARAYYA NAGAR, BELAGAVI, TAL. AND DIST. BELAGAVI. 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BELAGAVI, TQ. BELAGAVI, DISTRICT. BELAGAVI. 5. THE COMMISSIONER, CORPORATION OF CITY OF BELAGAVI, ASHOK NAGAR, BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI H.N.SHASHIDHAR, ADVOCATE AND SRI D.M.BANDI, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI V.S.KALASURMATH, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR R1, R2 AND R4; SRI CHETAN MUNNOLI, ADVOCATE FOR R5.) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE HIGH COURTS ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 17.02.2017, IN WRIT PETITION - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5314-DB WA No. 100135 of 2017 NOS.67359-67366/2011 AND W.P.NOS.67900-910/2011 PASSED BY THE SINGLE JUDGE; AND TO ALLOW W.P.NOS.67359-67366/2011 AND W.P.NOS.67900-910/2011, AND ETC.,. THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED THEREIN AS FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA) The present intra-Court appeal is filed under section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, by the appellants/writ petitioners calling in question the order dated 17.02.2017, passed in W.P.Nos.67359-67366/2011 and W.P.Nos.67900-910/2011, wherein the learned single Judge has dismissed the writ petitions. 2. The writ petitions were filed by the appellants/writ petitioners challenging the notification dated 08.09.2010, issued under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 18941 and the notification dated 07.09.2011 issued under section 6(1) of the Act. 1 Hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5314-DB WA No. 100135 of 2017 3. Learned counsel for the appellants has filed a memo on 17.03.2025 placing on record that the appellants are trying to secure enhanced compensation and that the learned counsel for appellants is unable to go on with the merits of the matter for want of instructions. 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.5 has placed on record a copy of the order dated 12.09.2024 passed in W.P.No.27521/2019, wherein a co-ordinate bench of this Court was considering a public interest litigation challenging the same acquisition. The acquisition of lands, vide the aforementioned notifications are situated in Belagavi, which were acquired for the purpose of construction of underground drainage plant. This Court, vide order dated 12.09.2024, dismissed the Writ Petition No.27521/2019. 5. The learned single Judge while considering the writ petitions, considered the contention of the writ petitioners that the final notification was issued more than one year after the preliminary notification and held that the final notification was issued within the stipulated period of - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5314-DB WA No. 100135 of 2017 one year and there is no delay in issuance of the final notification. 6. The other contention that was urged by the writ petitioners before the learned single Judge was that there was an alternative barren land that was available which was partly owned by private persons and partly owned by the Government and that the land of the petitioners are fertile agricultural lands. The learned single Judge considering the said contention held that possession of the lands has already been taken and that notification under section 16(2) of the Act has already been issued. Further, it was held that the lands of the petitioners are to an extent of 01 acre 12 guntas and that alternative land which is smaller extent could not be a possible alternative to the lands of the petitioners that is sought to be acquired. 7. It is clear from the aforementioned that the learned single Judge has considered various contention put forth by the petitioners and dismissed the writ petition by holding that public interest is required to prevail instead of private interest. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5314-DB WA No. 100135 of 2017 8. The appellants have failed to demonstrate the order passed by the learned single Judge in any manner erroneous. Also it is relevant to note that learned counsel for appellants has placed on record that the petitioners are seeking enhancement of compensation. 9. In view of the aforementioned, the above Writ Appeal stands dismissed. 10. In view of the same, the pending interlocutory applications stand disposed of as they do not survive for consideration. Sd/- (S G PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE MRK CT: UMD. List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32