SRI SRIKANTA D N WADIYAR (D) BY LR. Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION, 13 of 2011, Judgment Date: Nov 21, 2014
NON REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO. 13 OF 2011
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3303 OF 1997
Sri Srikanta D.N. Wadiyar (D)
Through LRs ... Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka and others ... Respondents
O R D E R
By means of this Interlocutory Application the first respondent -
State of Karnataka has prayed as under: -
"[i] Permit the State of Karnataka to widen the road in the adjoining
areas of the Palace Ground, Ramana Maharshi Road [Bellary Road] and
Jayamahal Road as per sketch;
[ii] grant permission to complete the proposed work of widening the roads,
utilizing total area of 15 Acres 39 guntas of the Bangalore Palace Ground,
in the interest of justice and equity; and
[iii] To pay compensation to the above land as per the calculation in the
original award, which is agreed upon by this Hon'ble Court on an earlier
occasion i.e., while disposing I.A. No. 2 on 15.02.1999 or any other
compensation package that this Hon'ble Court may suggest."
Heard learned counsel for the parties including the parties in connected
civil appeal Nos. 3309-3310 of 1997, 3305 of 1997, 3306 of 1997, 3308 of
1997, 3307 of 1997 and 3351 of 1997.
Brief facts of the case are that the Bangalore Palace (Acquisition and
Transfer) Act, 1996 (for short "the Act") was passed by Karnataka
Legislature to acquire Bangalore Palace, which compendiously means, main
palace building and other buildings with the surroundings open space and
the compound wall all around. Constitutionality of said Act was challenged
in Writ Petition Nos. 3383 of 1997, 32175 of 1996, 33146 of 1996, 33147 of
1996, 33148 of 1996, C/w Nos. 32175 of 1996, 33649 of 1996, 33785 of 1996
and 33786 of 1996 by the appellants who are legal heirs of late Maharaja of
Mysore and some other persons who claimed interest in the Bangalore Palace
and the land appurtenant thereto spread over in more than 400 acres of
land. Said writ petitions were dismissed vide judgment and order dated
31.3.1997 passed by the High Court of Karnataka upholding the validity of
the Act. From the perusal of record (including the order dated 15.7.2003
passed in these appeals), it appears that the issue relating to validity of
the Act in the aforementioned appeals is referred for consideration to nine-
Judge Bench.
By interim order dated 30.4.1997, this Court directed the parties to
maintain status quo pending disposal of special leave petition. Also, vide
another interim order dated 24.11.2000 passed on I.A. No. 11 of 2000 in
Civil Appeal No. 3303 of 1997, in terms of proposals made in paragraphs 3
and 4 in the reply of said application, and acceptance expressed by the
Advocate General, the respondent-State appears to have been allowed to
utilize the palace land for road widening and construction of underpass
near Mekhri Circle, Bangalore, i.e., land adjacent to the roads between New
Airport constructed at Devanhalli (Bangalore International Airport) and
Bangalore Palace. From order dated 24.11.2000 passed in I.A. No. 11 of
2000 it further reveals that the learned Advocate General of the State
submitted before this Court that for calculation of compensation, the
formula laid down in the order passed on 15.2.1999 in I.A. No. 2 in Civil
Appeal No. 3303 of 1997 shall be followed.
It is submitted on behalf of the respondent-State that road widening is
necessary for easing the traffic congestion and frequent traffic jams. It
is further stated by the respondent-State in the present I.A. No. 13 of
2011 that Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) has mooted proposal to
widen Ramana Maharshi Road (Bellary Road - New Airport Road) and Jayamahal
Road adjacent to Bangalore Palace, as these roads are directly linked with
the New Airport. According to the proposal of the plan prepared by BBMP a
total land of 15 acres 39 guntas is needed for the project. Commissioner,
BBMP, through his letter dated 20.11.2009, made necessary request to the
Principal Secretary to Government, DPAR of the State, in reply to which
said authority vide its letter dated 10.12.2009, agreed for the proposed
project of widening the road in and around palace ground, and a permission
for the purposes of acquisition of land was communicated vide communication
dated 25.1.2001 (Annexure R-3 to the present application).
Regarding details of the land measuring 15 acres 39 guntas paragraph 5 of
the present I.A. No. 13 of 2011 is reproduced below: -
"5. It is submitted that the Commissioner of B.B.M.P. has written one
more letter dated 0505.2010 to the Additional Chief Secretary and Principal
Secretary, Urban Development Department, Bangalore, bringing to his notice
the Project for Road widening and copy of the said letter dated 05.05.2010
is herewith produced and marked as ANNEXURE-R4. The statement showing the
area of land of Bangalore Palace Ground required for widening the Bellary
Road from B.D.A. junction to Mekhri Circle [2.55 Kms. To 4.05 Kms. = 1.5
Km.] is as under:
Sl. Name of the From Chanage Length Average Area
No. Owner [in Km.] in Mtr. Width in in sq.
To Mtr.
1 2 3 4 5 6
7
Sri Srikantadatta 2.55 3.227 667.00 18.38
12446.00
N. Wadiyar
Miss Minakshi 3.227 3+385.50 158.50 23.40 3710.00
Devi
Miss Kamakshi 3+384.5 3.545 158.50 17.75 2813.50
Devi
Miss Vishalakshi 3.544 3+702.50 158.50 18.65 2955.50
Devi
Sri Sridhar 3+702.50 3+895.50 193.00 17.49 3375.87
Ramachandraraju
Urs
Smt. Indirakshi 3+895.50 4.05 154.50 6.18 955.12
Devi
Total [A] 1500.00 26256.00
[B] Land of Bangalore Palace Ground required for Jayamahal Road Widening
from Mekhri Circle to Cantonment Railway Station is as under:
Sl. Name of the From Chanage Length Average Area
No. Owner [in Km.] in Mtr. Width in in sq.
To Mtr.
2 3 4 5 6
7
1. Sri Srikantadatta 0+000 1.582 1582.00 17.19
27201.25
N. Wadiyar
Miss Indrakshi 0+650 0+700 50.00 3.2 160.00
Devi
Sri A. 1.582 2.74 1158.00 9.53 11038.75
Chandrashekar
Raja
M/s. Chamundi
Hotels Pvt. Ltd.
Total [B] 2790.00 -- 38400.00
Grand Total : [A+B] = 64.656.00 Sqm. [15A - 39G]
A copy of the sketch showing the widening of the road is herewith produced
and marked as ANNEXURE-R5."
Learned counsel for the respondent-State argued that existing roads in and
around Bangalore Palace are very congested leading to frequent traffic jams
and traffic disorders. As such the widening of the road has become
essential. It is further contended that widening of the road is in the
public interest to avoid traffic jams. It is also informed that BBMP had
already widened Bellary Road from Rajbhawan to Devanhalli, except the
stretch near the Bangalore Palace ground.
Learned counsel for the appellants in the present case and learned counsel
for the appellants in the connected appeals, except the appellant in Civil
Appeal No. 3309 of 1997, in response to above arguments, submitted that
they are ready to surrender the required land as above provided Transfer
Development Right (TDR) is given to them under the TDR Rules. Some of the
appellants said to have already received usual compensation also.
Learned counsel for the non-applicants (appellants in various appeals) have
stated that, in the public interest, as expressed in the need to widen the
existing roads, they would be willing to accept the proposal of the Bruhat
Bangalore Mahanagara Palike in its letter dated 26.12.2009 in which the
penultimate paragraph reads as follows: -
"As per your request Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palika will be
issuing TDR for the extent of land acquired as per Karnataka Town & Country
Planning Act, and the TDR guidelines subject to the final decision of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court."
The State, however, did not grant its approval to this proposal and has
instead offered to pay compensation for the acquisition as per the rates
relevant at the time of the passing of the Act. The impasse is, therefore,
to be crossed.
In the above circumstances, having considered the submissions of learned
counsel for the parties, including learned counsel for the parties in all
the connected appeals, without prejudice to the rights of the parties, and
keeping in mind the necessity of widening of the road, and the public
interest, we think it just and proper to allow I.A. No. 13 of 2011 subject
to condition that the appellants in the present appeal and the connected
appeals shall be given TDR for widening of the road as per TDR Rules.
....................................J.
[Vikramajit Sen]
....................................J.
[Prafulla C. Pant]
New Delhi;
November 21, 2014.
For the Latest Updates
Join Now