Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3667 (KAR)

SRI.RACHAIAH S/O GURAIAH RACHAPPAIAHANMATH, v. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,

WP/60349/2011 · 2025-04-21

Jyoti Mulimani

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:4873 WP No. 60349 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M.G.UMA WRIT PETITION NO.60349/2011(LA-KIADB) BETWEEN: 1. RACHAIAH S/O. GURAIAH RACHAPPAIAHANMATH, AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE. 2. SRISHAILAIAH S/O. RACHAIAH RACHAPPAIAHANMATH, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE. 3. SHEKARAIAH S/O. RACHAIAH RACHAPPAIAHANMATH, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE. 4. PADADAIAH S/O. RACHAIAH RACHAPPAIAHANMATH, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE. 5. SAVITRAVVA W/O. RACHAIAH RACHAPPAIAHANMATH, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK. ALL ARE RESIDENT OF PATTAD KAL VILLAGE, TQ: BADAMI, DISTRICT: BAGALKOT. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI H. M. DHARIGOND, ADV. (ABSENT)) AND: 1. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, DHARWAD. Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:4873 WP No. 60349 of 2011 2. THE CONSERVATION ASSISTANT, ARCHAEOLOGICAL, SURVEY OF INDIA, BADAMI CIRCLE, BADAMI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI P.N.HATTI, AGA FOR R1; SRI MRUTYUNJAY TATA BANGI, ADV. FOR R2; SRI VENKATESH M. KHARVI, ADV. FOR R1 AND R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, QUASH THE ENTIRE ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS, CULMINATING IN ISSUING THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 27.07.2009 UNDER NO.KIADB-BHUSWA- BHA/09-10, VIDE ANNEXURE – C AND D. A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECT THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE – E AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner is absent. No representation. 2. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2 are present. 3. The order sheet dated 02.01.2024 reads as follows: “1. None appears for the petitioner. 2. If none were to appear for the petitioner on the next date of hearing, the petition would be liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution. - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:4873 WP No. 60349 of 2011 3. Re-list on 22.01.2024.” 4. In-spite of that there is no representation for the petitioner. Hence, the petition is dismissed. SD/- JUDGE EM/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34