Jayalakshmi v. Union of India

((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:41975( WP(No.(23166(of(2026( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010511992026( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

TH DATED(THIS(THE(7 (DAY(OF(AUGUST,(2026(

BEFORE(

THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(R.(NATARAJ(

WRIT(PETITION(NO.(23166(OF(2026((LA-RES)(

BETWEEN:(( (

1., JAYALAKSHMI, W/O,LATE,T.,GOVINDAPPA,, AGED,ABOUT,70,YEARS,, ,

2., T.V.,PANDURANGA,

S/O,LATE,T.,VENKATAPPA,, AGED,ABOUT,65,YEARS, ,

3., T.V.,RAMESH,

S/O,LATE,T.,VENKATAPPA, AGED,ABOUT,62,YEARS, ,

PETITIONERS,ARE,RESIDENTS,OF,NO.468,,, ST 1 ,CROSS,,BASAVANAGUDI,,, Digitally SHIVAMOGGA-577,201,signedtiby HEMALATHA0J …PETITIONERS, Location: HIGH0COURT (BY,SRI.,P.N.HARISH.,ADVOCATE), OF KARNATAKA AND:( (

1., UNION,OF,INDIA, MINISTRY,OF,ROAD,TRANSPORT,AND,HIGHWAYS, TRANSPORT,BHAVANA,1,,, PARLIAMENT,STREET,,, NEW,DELHI-110,001,

2., SPECIAL,LAND,ACQUISITION,OFFICER,AND, COMPETENT,AUTHORITY,, NATIONAL,HIGHWAYS,, ((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:41975( WP(No.(23166(of(2026( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010511992026( ( ( K.R.,CIRCLE,, BENGALURU-560,009., ,

3., RAMYA, W/O,L.,MAHESH, MAJOR,IN,AGE, R/O,GIRIJA,,100M,FEET,ROAD,, SHIVAMOGGA-577,201, …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,POOJAPPA,J.,,CGSC,FOR,R1;, ,,,,,,SRI.SHOBITH,N,SHETTY,,ADVOCATE,FOR,R2, ,,,,,,NOTICE,TO,R3,DISPENSED,WITH)( , , THIS, WP, IS, FILED, UNDER, ARTICLES, 226, AND, 227, OF, THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA, PRAYING, TO, DIRECTING, THE, RESPONDENT,NO.2,TO,CONCLUDE,AND,DECIDE,THE,PROCEEDINGS, INITIATED, IN, LAC, ARBT, 28/2014-15, AS, PER, ANNEXURE-J, IN, ACCORDANCE, WITH, LAW, WITH, A, REASONABLE, PERIOD, OF, TIME, AND,ETC., , THIS,PETITION,,COMING,ON,FOR,ORDERS,,THIS,DAY,,ORDER, WAS,MADE,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, CORAM:, HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,R.,NATARAJ, , ORAL(ORDER( The, petitioners, have, sought, for, a, writ, in, the, nature, of, mandamus, to, direct, the, respondent, No.2, to, conclude, and, decide,the,proceedings,initiated,in,LAC,ARBT,28/2014-15.,

2.

(i) The petitioners contend that father of the petitioner No.2 had purchased guntas of land in Sy.No.150/1 of Purle Village and that his name was entered in the revenue records. They contend that the aforesaid land was acquired by the respondent No.1 for the purposes of the respondent No.2 for formation of National Highway. They contend that the mother of petitioner No.2 made a request to the respondent No.2 to issue an award notice in her favour.

(ii) They contend that, she then came to know that there were certain mistakes in the revenue records and the name of the father of the petitioner No.2 was discontinued. Therefore, a representation was given to the Tahsildar to rectify the mistake and to enter her name in the revenue records, which was declined by the Tahsildar resulting in an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner, who in terms of an order dated 05.08.2014 directed the Tahsildar to enter the name of the mother of the petitioner No.2.

(iii) The Tahsildar then again issued an endorsement refusing to enter the name of the petitioners in the revenue records, which was again challenged before the Assistant

Commissioner, who passed an order directing the Tahsildar to enter the name of the petitioners in the revenue records. After considering the report of the Assistant Director of Land Records dated 27.12.2016, the Tahsildar initiated proceedings and after considering the entire material, passed an order dated

23.03.2018 and held that 16 guntas belonging to the petitioners out of 24 guntas owned by them was acquired by the Highways Authority, but compensation was wrongfully disbursed in favour of the respondent No.3.

(iv) The petitioner No.1 then gave representation to the respondent No.2 on 27.10.2021, requesting the respondent No.2 to pay compensation for the land acquired. The respondent No.2 then initiated proceedings in LAC ARBT 28/2014-15 and issued notice to the respondent No.3 and also to the petitioners. The petitioners submitted their representations and objections along with their documents.

(v) The petitioners contend that though the respondent No.2 conducted hearings, after issuing notice to the petitioners and the respondent No.3, the proceeding is not finalized till

date and therefore seeks for direction to the respondent No.2 to conclude the proceedings as early as possible.

¶3The learned counsel for the respondent No.2 submits that proceedings initiated in LAC ARBT 28/2014-15 would be taken up for consideration expeditiously.

¶4In view of the aforesaid submission, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondent No.2 to conclude the proceedings in LAC ARBT 28/2014-15 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE

BKN/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22