Karnataka HC Refuses To Regularise Woman’s Pre-Acquisition Home In PRR-II Alignment, Bars Demolition Until BDA Determines Compensation

The petitioner said she purchased a 40 × 60-foot site in Kenchanapura Village in 2004 and constructed a house on it.

The BDA’s preliminary acquisition notification for the Peripheral Ring Road-II/Major Arterial Road was issued in 2006, followed by a final notification in 2011.

The respondents stated that the petitioner’s house lies within Sy. No. 5/1, which was acquired for the road, and that an award provided developed land in lieu of monetary compensation for the acquired lands in Sy. Nos. 5/1 to 5/4.

The petitioner sought consideration of her representations, regularisation of her house and protection against demolition.

The petitioner then approached the High Court under Article 226.

The acquisition was undertaken under Sections 17(1) and 3 of the Bengaluru Development Authority Act, 1976, as stated by the respondents.

The Court treated the award as providing for compensation—monetary or in developed land—for land acquired for the road, and held that the petitioner was entitled to compensation under that award because her property lay within the notified area.

The respondents admitted that the petitioner’s house was situated in Sy. No. 5/1, within the area acquired for the road.

The Court therefore held that she was entitled to compensation under the award, but declined to direct regularisation because the house lay within the road margin.

As the house had been constructed before acquisition, the Court also considered the risk that the notified khatedar might claim developed-land compensation for the petitioner’s site.

It directed inspection and verification of revenue sites in the acquired portions, followed by a meeting with the petitioner and other site owners and, upon verification of their purchases, proportionate allotment of developed land.

The BDA was directed to inspect the acquired portions of Sy. Nos. 5/1 to 5/4, identify any revenue sites, verify the site owners’ purchases and determine and allot developed land proportionate to their respective interests.

The BDA was also directed to assess the value of the petitioner’s building within four weeks; after that assessment, she was to vacate and hand over possession.

The exercise was to be completed within three months, and the respondents were not to damage or demolish the house until it was completed.