Shivaram Karanth Layout: SC dismisses review petitions

The Supreme Court has dismissed a batch of review petitions filed against the August 3, 2018 judgement which directed the Karnataka government and the Bangalore Development Authority to ensure the acquisition of 3,500 acres of land for 'Dr K Shivaram Karanth Layout'.

A bench of Justices Arun Mishra and S Abdul Nazeer declined to reconsider its judgement, which may affect hundreds of people who have built their dwellings and establishments over the land.

“We have perused the review petitions and record of the civil appeals and special leave petitions and are convinced that the orders of which the review has been sought, does not suffer from any apparent error warranting its reconsideration,” the bench said in its order passed on May 2.

In its judgement, the top court had then taken a strong exception to alleged “connivance of influential political persons or otherwise” in the move to exclude large tracts of land (about 650 acres) from acquisition for the formation of the layout proposed in 2008 during the regime of then Chief Minister B S Yeddyurappa. The court had also appointed former Karnataka High Court judge, Justice K N Keshavanarayana, to conduct an inquiry for “fixing responsibility” on the officials of the BDA and the state government.

In review petitions filed through advocate Sanjay M Nuli, Mahesh Thakur and Amit Pai, the petitioners, who were landowners, flat owners, and real estate developers, contended the apex court failed to appreciate that the preliminary notification of December 30, 2008, to acquire the land for the formation of Dr Shivarama Karanth Layout has lapsed as it was not implemented till date.

They also pointed the BDA had already received development charges for their properties as the layout plan for the construction of various properties has already been approved.

The petitioners submitted that they have invested an enormous amount of money for the construction and development of the area in and around the layout.

The preliminary notification was on the acquisition of 3,500 acres of land for the layout but the issue remained mired in a legal battle and thousands of people built their houses or establishments over there.

“It would render the principles of natural justice invalid if they are not afforded a chance to present the issue. Although they were not made a party in the previous rounds of litigation, the petitioner is still largely affected as a consequence of the passing of the order by this court,” the petitioners contended.