The civil appeals between Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Limited (KNNL) and the land owners of Bennethora Project, Lower Mullamari Project, and Amarja Project in Kalaburagi have led to a compensation dispute. The High Court has granted varied compensation amounts for the acquired lands, leading to a series of appeals and remands. Stay tuned for further developments in this legal battle.
Facts
- The civil appeals pertain to the Bennethora Project, Lower Mullamari Project, and Amarja Project situated in Kalaburagi, Karnataka.
- The acquisition was carried out under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
- About 13000 acres of land were acquired by the State of Karnataka for various projects like Bennethora Project, Gandori Nala Project, Lower Mullamari Project, and Amarja Project.
- The acquisition process included parcels of lands owned by the respondent-land owners of different villages.
- Compensation for the acquired land was initially granted at varying rates by the SLAO on different dates.
- The appellant, Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Limited (Corporation), claims to be the beneficiary of the subject-acquisition.
- The Corporation is responsible for planning, executing, and operating drinking water and irrigation projects and schemes in Karnataka.
- The High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench enhanced the compensation for the acquired land in the impugned judgements.
- The owners of the acquired lands approached the High Court for higher compensation, which was subsequently granted.
- The compensation amounts were further enhanced by the District Court and the High Court in the appeals.
- The rates of compensation were categorized project-wise for the Bennethora Project, Amarja Project, and Lower Mullamari Project.
- The process of acquisition, issuance of Section 4 notifications, Section 6 declarations, and SLAO awards were detailed project-wise in the judgements.
- The High Court granted varied compensation amounts based on the project and land type (dry/wet lands).
- The High Court granted enhanced compensation amounts in various judgments for different projects.
- The compensation amounts varied from Rs. 83,500/- per acre to Rs. 1,78,429/- per acre for dry lands and Rs. 2,46,334/- for wet lands.
- Challenges were raised against the compensation amount of Rs. 1,20,814/- per acre for dry lands and Rs. 1,81,221/- per acre for wet lands in some cases.
- In the case of The Executive Engineer, KNNL Vs. Annarao @ Anveerappa & Anr., the Supreme Court found that the High Court did not analyze the cases independently or consider specific parameters required for just compensation.
- The Supreme Court ordered that parties be sent back to the High Court for reconsideration of the compensation amounts in accordance with the law.
Also Read: Interference with Acquittal Orders: Legal Analysis
Arguments
- Learned senior counsel for the appellant-Corporation argues that the matter has been partially heard by the High Court after remand.
- Opposing this, learned senior counsel for the appellant(s) argues that the cases heard by the High Court pertained to different villages and cannot be used for claiming parity.
- In contrast, learned senior counsel for the respondents-land owners points out that many similarly situated land owners have already received compensation at an enhanced rate through High Court decisions.
Also Read: Analysis of Suppression of Information in Employment Selection: Legal Perspective
Analysis
- In the present batch of appeals, the impugned order passed by the High Court in CA No. 4053/2024 heavily relied on its own decision in Rajshekhar’s case.
- Certain other appeals saw reliance on High Court decisions in cases like Malkajappa @ Mallikarjun, Kalappa, and Motibee which were not favored by the Court in the Annarao @ Anveerappa case.
- A batch of cases has been remanded by the Court for reconsideration by the High Court.
- The matters pertain to the same broader acquisition but may involve different projects.
- Some judgments of the High Court have finalized compensation amounts while others are still under adjudication.
- The cases are remanded to the High Court for a holistic view on the subject acquisition, on a project-wise basis.
- The High Court is expected to ensure uniformity in compensation awards to the extent possible within the confines of the law.
- The compensation awarded should not be reduced to a lower rate than what has already been finalized and paid to certain landowners.
Also Read: Analysis of Cheating and Forgery in Passport Case
Decision
- The impugned judgments and orders have been set aside and the appeals/petitions are remanded to the High Court for reconsideration.
- The High Court is directed to take up the matters along with Rajshekhar’s case and other cases that are already part heard.
- The High Court is requested to decide the matters expeditiously, preferably within three months from the date of this judgment.
- Parties are directed to appear before the High Court on 18.03.2024 at the Karnataka Kalaburagi Bench.
- High Court may assign a suitable date for hearing of the cases on 11.07.2022, proceeding notification-wise pertaining to concerned villages as a separate group.
- The High Court is advised to dispose of the appeals expeditiously given the notifications dating back to 1983.
- The appeals are disposed of in the above terms.
Case Title: THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KNNL Vs. SUBHASHCHANDRA (2024 INSC 208)
Case Number: C.A. No.-004053-004053 / 2024
