- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31599 WP No. 40044 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 40044 OF 2016 (LA-KHB) BETWEEN: SMT. SAVITHA W/O P. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS NO.21/1, 10TH CROSS, KRISHNAPPA BLOCK GANGANAGAR BENGALURU-560 032 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MANU P. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA HOUSING DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDINGS BENGALURU-560 001 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY 2. THE KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD CAUVERY BHAVAN K.G.ROAD BENGALURU-560 009 REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER 3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER THE KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD CAUVERY BHAVAN, K.G.ROAD BENGALURU-560 009 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, Digitally signed by HEMALATHA J Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31599 WP No. 40044 of 2016 BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU-560 009 5. THE TAHSILDAR BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU-560 009 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ADITYA DIWAKAR, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1, 4 AND 5; SRI. V.N.MURTHY, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS. 2 AND 3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE ACQUISITION NOTIFICATION NO.KHB.LAQ.1/89-90 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 4(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT (STATE ACT) ANNEXURE ‘F’ DATED 06.04.1989 AND PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE ON 18.01.1990 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AND DECLARATION DATED 25.03.1991 MADE UNDER SECTION 6(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISTION ACT (STATE ACT) AND PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE ON 25.03.1991 VIDE ANNEXURE-G BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IS INVALID AND HAS LAPSED BY OPERATION OF LAW AND SUCH QUASH THE SAME BY ISSUING A WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31599 WP No. 40044 of 2016 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ 7 ORAL ORDER The petitioner has challenged the notification bearing No.PÀUÀȪÀÄ.¨sÀÆ.¸Áé.«.1/89-90 dated 06.04.1989 issued by the respondent No.2 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the L.A. Act’) and the declaration bearing No.PÀAE310 ¨sÀƸÁé ¨É90 dated 25.03.1991 under Section 6(1) of the L.A Act issued by the respondent No.1 as invalid and lapsed in respect of the Site bearing No.49, Municipal Khata No.399, formed in the land bearing Sy. No.54 situate at Yelahanka Hobli, Allalasandra Village, Bengaluru North Taluk, measuring East to West 40 feet and North to South 40 feet. She has also sought for a declaration that the aforesaid notifications having been issued without there being a sanction by the State Government are invalid as the same are not in accordance with law. She has sought for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the proceedings of the respondent No.4 bearing No.J¯ï J PÀÆå (1) ¹ Dgï 4:2001-02 dated 22.09.2001 and the possession letter bearing No.J¯ï J PÀÆå:2002-03 dated 26.06.2002. She has also sought for a direction to the respondent No.2 to either - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31599 WP No. 40044 of 2016 reconstruct the building or pay damages for having demolished the buildings. 2(i). The petitioner contends that the land in Sy.No.54 measuring 04 Acres 13 guntas situate at Allalasandra Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, was owned by Sri Muttappa Munishamappa Rangappa and Ramaiah having purchased it in terms of a sale deed dated 28.03.1944. The said persons formed a revenue layout of residential sites and executed a power of attorney in favour of Sri Chikka Muniyappa in respect of certain sites formed while they retained a few others. The petitioner claims that the said revenue layout was formed during the year 1984-85 and the petitioner purchased Site No.49 (Municipal khata No.399) formed in the land bearing Sy. No.54 situate at Allalasandra Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, measuring 40 feet x 40 feet from Sri Chikka Muniyappa in terms of a sale deed dated 20.12.2000. She contends that during the middle of February 2007, some strangers visited the layout and started putting numbers on the houses. On enquiry, she came to know that they are from the respondent No.2 and that they had instructions to put the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31599 WP No. 40044 of 2016 numbers on the houses. The petitioner and others then visited the respondent No.2, who did not respond. The petitioner thereafter secured information and came to know that certain lands in Allalasandra Village were acquired by the Government for the purpose of the respondent No.2. The petitioner contends that though the final notification is issued, the respondent No.1 has not taken over possession of the site belonging to her. She claims that she came to know that the respondent Nos.1 and 2 had released several properties mentioned in the notifications after collecting charges while some of the other properties were de-notified. Following the above, the petitioner and other occupants submitted a representation to the Hon'ble Chief Minister requesting to protect their possession. As per the direction issued by the Hon'ble Chief Minister, Under Secretary to the Hon’ble Chief Minister sent a note dated 02.03.2007 to the Secretary to the Government, Housing Department, requesting him to submit a report. On 20.03.2007, the Secretary to the Government, Housing Department requested the Commissioner of the respondent No.2 to submit a report. The petitioner claims that since the request of the petitioner and others for exclusion of - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31599 WP No. 40044 of 2016 their properties was pending consideration before the State Government, the petitioner did not move the matter. Further, on 30.04.2007, the petitioner claims that some 500 persons along with Police barged into the layout and demolished the building one after the other. When enquired, they were informed that they were doing so at the instructions of the respondent No.2. The petitioner then came to know about the respective notifications issued by the respondent Nos.2 and 1, which are impugned in this petition. The petitioner contends that the respondent No.4 has not passed an award as required under Section 11A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 within two years from the date of the publication of the declaration though the draft award was approved by the Revenue Department on 05.01.1999. Hence, it is contended that the acquisition has lapsed. (ii). She contends that some similarly placed persons had filed W.P. No.9593/2007 and connected writ petitions before this Court challenging the acquisition of various bits of land / revenue sites in Allalasandra village as well as the letter dated 26.06.2002 issued by the Tahasildar, Bengaluru North Taluk, taking over possession of the acquired land. She claims - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31599 WP No. 40044 of 2016 that the writ petitions were allowed and the acquisition proceedings in respect of the lands involved in the said writ petitions were quashed in terms of an order passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court dated 29.05.2012. Thereafter, the respondent Nos.2 and 3 filed W.A. No.3469/2012 and connected writ appeals, which were also dismissed in terms of a judgment passed by a Division Bench of this Court on 26.11.2015. The petitioner, therefore, contends that the impugned notifications are also liable to be quashed in so far as her property is concerned. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the above submissions. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 3 did not dispute the fact that the notifications impugned in this writ petition were called in question in W.P. No.9593/2007 and connected writ petitions, which was allowed in terms of the order passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court dated 29.05.2012 and confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in terms of a judgment dated 26.11.2015 passed in W.A. No.3469/2012 and connected writ appeals. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31599 WP No. 40044 of 2016 5. In that view of the matter, without going into the various contentions urged by the petitioner in the writ petition, it would be appropriate to dispose off this writ petition in the light of the findings recorded by a coordinate Bench of this Court in the order dated 29.05.2012 passed in W.P. No.9593/2007 and connected writ petitions, which was upheld by a Division Bench of this Court in terms of a judgment dated 26.11.2015 passed in W.A. No.3469/2012 and connected writ appeals. 6. Consequently, this petition is allowed. The notification bearing No.PÀUÀȪÀÄ.¨sÀÆ.¸Áé.«.1/89-90 dated 06.04.1989 issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the L.A. Act’) by the respondent No.2 and the declaration bearing No.PÀAE 310 ¨sÀƸÁé ¨ÉA90 dated 25.03.1991 issued under Section 6(1) of the L.A Act by the respondent No.1 in respect of the Site bearing No.49 (Municipal khata No.399) formed in the land bearing Sy. No.54 situate at Allalasandra Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, measuring 40 feet x 40 feet situate at Allalasandra Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, is quashed. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31599 WP No. 40044 of 2016 7. As a result, the official memorandum bearing No.J¯ï J PÀÆå (1) ¹ Dgï 4:2001-02 dated 22.09.2001 issued by the respondent No.4 and the supardu letter bearing No.J¯ï J PÀÆå:2002-03 dated 26.06.2002 issued by the respondent No.5 regarding possession of the lands mentioned therein being handed over to the respondent No.3 are quashed in so far as the property of the petitioner is concerned. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE SMA/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 65