Supreme Court slams Karnataka for delay in compensation for land acquired for Bengaluru-Mysuru Infra project

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday said the right to property is human right in a welfare State, and a constitutional right under Article 300-A of the Constitution and a person cannot be dispossessed of his property without paying compensation promptly.

A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Vishwanathan criticised the Karnataka government authorities for making land owners Bernard Francis Joseph Vaz and others, to suffer without compensation for 22 years on account of the officers' "deep slumber" and "lethargic attitude" for the land acquired for infrastructure corridor project connecting Bengaluru-Mysuru.

In exercise of its extraordinary power under Article 142 of the Constitution to do complete justice, the bench directed for determination of the market value of the land in question as on April 22, 2019.

The bench directed the Special Land Acquisition Officer to pass a fresh award within a period of two months.

"If the compensation to be awarded at the market value as of the year 2003 is permitted, it would amount to permitting a travesty of justice and making the constitutional provisions under Article 300-A a mockery," the bench said.

The court noted the possession of the appellants’ land was taken over by the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board on November 22, 2005 and subsequently handed over to Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprise and its sister concern Nandi Economic Corridor Enterprises Ltd. However, no award was passed immediately for such acquisitions.

Emphasising that Article 300-A of the Constitution provides that no person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law, the bench said, it cannot be gainsaid that the appellants have been deprived of their legitimate dues for almost 22 years ago.

"It can also not be controverted that money is what money buys. The value of money is based on the idea that money can be invested to earn a return, and that the purchasing power of money decreases over time due to inflation," it said.

The bench pointed out what the appellants could have bought with the compensation in 2003 cannot do in 2025.

"It is, therefore, of utmost importance that the determination of the award and disbursal of compensation in case of acquisition of land should be made with promptitude," the bench said.

The court allowed the appeal and set aside the Karnataka High Court's division bench judgment of November 22, 2022, which rejected the plea of the appellants for determining compensation as per the current market value.

"Since the State/KIADB was in deep slumber from 2003 to 2019 and acted for the first time only after the notices were issued in contempt proceedings, we find that though SLAO had no power to shift the date for determination of market value, he had rightly done so. The Single Judge of the High Court also does not say that the determination of compensation to be awarded by shifting of the date by the SLAO to that of 2011 was unjust but only sets aside the award on the ground that SLAO had no jurisdiction to do so," the bench said.

The court noted the division bench had dismissed the plea by the appellants on hyper technical ground.

"The division bench of the High Court should have, especially taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the present case, at least considered the case of the appellants. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the judgment and order of November 22, 2022 by the division bench of the High Court is liable to be quashed and set aside on this short ground alone," the bench said.