MARUTESH S/O HULAGAPPA BARAKER v. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
WP/100526/2024 · 2025-04-17
Jyoti Mulimani
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 52902 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 52902 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:6604 WP No. 100526 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 100526 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
MARUTESH S/O HULAGAPPA BARAKER, AGE ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: GINEGERA, TQ: KOPPAL, DIST: KOPPAL-583 231. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. M.B. NARGUND, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. M.M. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KOPPAL DISTRICT, KOPPAL-583 231. 2. THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL ENGINEER (EAST), SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY, HUBBALLI-580 023, DIST: DHARWAD. 3. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER, SOUTH-WESTERN RAILWAY, KESHWAPUR, HUBBALLI-580 023, DIST: DHARWAD. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. M.B. KANAVI, ADVOCATE FOR R2-R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:6604 WP No. 100526 of 2024
THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
Sri.M.B.Nargund., Senior counsel on behalf of Sri.M.M.Patil., for the petitioner has appeared through video conferencing. Sri.Praveen K.Uppar., AGA for respondent No.1 and Sri.M.B.Kanavi., counsel for respondents 2 and 3 have appeared in person. 2. The petitioner contends that he is the absolute owner of the land bearing Sy.No.72/*/* and 71/*/1 situated at Basapura Village, Koppal Taluk and it is contended that he has developed the land into Residential Layout. He made an application for approval of the said layout to the Koppal Urban Development Authority, Koppal for approval of the final plan. Accordingly, the Authority has approved the final plan on
05.07.2023. Thereafter, necessary infrastructure was done. The petitioner came to know that the Railway Authorities have made use of a portion of a land in Sy.No.72/*/* for the construction of underpass. The petitioner’s grievance is that the
- 3 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:6604 WP No. 100526 of 2024
Railway Authorities without acquiring the land has utilized a portion of his land in Sy.No.72/*/* for the construction of the underpass and has not paid the compensation. Under these circumstances, the petitioner is seeking a prayer to initiate the acquisition proceedings and pay the compensation in accordance with the existing law including all statutory benefits to him. 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions.
Heard the arguments and perused the writ papers with care. 4. This Court vide order dated:21.02.2024 appointed the ADLR as a Court Commissioner to carried out the survey of the lands and to submit the report. Accordingly, the ADLR submitted the report. Counsel for the respective parties jointly submits that they are in receipt of the Commissioner’s report and are aware of the contents of the report. The oral submission made by counsel for the respective parties is placed on record. The Commissioner’s report is submitted to the Court and is part of the Writ papers. I have perused the same minutely. The Commissioner has reported that while doing the
- 4 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:6604 WP No. 100526 of 2024
work of RuB, the Railways has encroached a portion of the land in Sy.No.72/*/* that belongs to the petitioner. The reported depicts that the Railway Authorities have utilized a portion of the land in Sy.No.72/*/* that belongs to the petitioner. Under these circumstances, this Court deems it proper to direct the respondents to initiate appropriate action for the acquisition of the utilized land and pay the compensation to the petitioner in accordance with the existing law including all statutory benefits at the earliest. Needless to say, the initiation and the conclusion of the action must be done strictly in accordance with the law. 5. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is allowed. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE
MRP,RH LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 46