Case: B. Anjanappa &amp; Others Vs. Vyalikaval House Building Co-Operative Society Limited &amp; Others

4. By Notification dated 22.12.1984 issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the Act), the State Government proposed the acquisition of 165 acres, 30 gunthas land of Nagavara and other villages for the benefit of respondent No.1. The declaration under Section 6(1) of the Act was issued on 21.2.1986. Some of the landowners filed writ petitions for quashing the two notifications by contending that the acquisition was not for a public purpose and that the proceedings were vitiated due to arbitrariness and malafides. The writ petitions were allowed by the Division Bench of the High Court by detailed judgment titled Narayana Reddy v. State of Karnataka, I.L.R. 1991 Karnataka 2248. In its judgment, the Division Bench considered the acquisition of land made in favour of seven housing societies by different notifications issued between 1984 and 1988 declared that the acquisition proceedings were vitiated due to arbitrariness, malafide and violation of the provisions of the Act. In paragraphs 25 to 28 of the judgment, the Division Bench of the High Court specifically adverted to the case of respondent No.1 and found serious violations of the provisions of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 and held that respondent No.1 had succeeded in securing the acquisition of land despite these violations.

Reasoning:
27. In the result, the appeals are allowed. The impugned judgment as also the order passed by the learned Single Judge are set aside and the writ petition filed by respondent No.1 is dismissed.28. If respondent No.1 is in possession of the acquired land or any portion thereof, then the same shall be returned to the concerned landowners within a period of two months from today. This direction shall apply not only qua the appellants but other landowners who may not have filed writ appeals or the special leave petitions, may be due to poverty, illeteracy or ignorance.29. However, it is made clear that the above mentioned directions shall not apply to such of the landowners who have withdrawn the special leave petitions.