IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

[Order XVI Rule 4(1) (a)] CIVIL APPELIATE JURISDICTION

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION
[Under Article 136 of the Constitution of India]

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO 12153 OF 2000

SYNOPSIS / LIST OF DATES

[1] 12-10-1984 : The petition schedule lands are Urban Lands situated within the Planning area and are earmarked in the Comprehensive Development plan for residential purposes. The ands are not being used for agricultural purposes. The Comprehensive Development plan has come into force/effect from 12-10-1984. Section 2(C ) of Urban Lands [ceiling & Regulations] Act 1976 defines Urban Lands.Clause [ C ] of Explanation there to provides that the land shall not be deemed to be mainly used for the purpose of agricultural in the lands has been specified in the Master Plan for the purpose of other than agriculture. Section 2(q) of the Act defines vacant land to mean not being land mainly used for the purpose of Agriculture in an Urban Agglomenation. In view of the provisions of the Urban Land Ceiling Act the petition schedule lands and Urban lands are ceased to be agricultural lands and in view of the overriding effect of the Urban Ceiling Act the provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act 1964 and the provisions of the Karnataka Town & Country Planning Act 1961 are not applicable to the lands in question [File Code: 026.11 Suprem Court.Judgement.KAR GOV Circular ]. The relevant provisions of ULC Act, filed herewith and marked as Annexure P-1 to this Petition.

On an application made by the petitioner the State Government initiated proceedings for acquisition of the petition schedule lands for the benefit of the petitioner for public purposes [Link Code: 026.02 Agreement.Govt. & Society ] [File Code: 003.05 KPC ] [File Code: 003.01 Agremt. SC HMT ] [ 003.07 SreenivasaHBCS ] [Link code 004.07 fraud.SC Jment ] [ Fraud Housing Society ; according to us]. In respect of the said acquisition the Government directed the petitioner to deposit the cost of acquisition.

[2] 5-04-1990 : The Government issued letter to the petitioner No.1 requesting the petitioner to deposit the balancecost of acquisition [File Code: 026.13 slao Rs.2.02 crore demand 1987 ]. The cost of acquisition demanded by the Government includes conversion fine @ Rs. 21,780/- per acre and Establishment chare and Audit charges at 10% besides otheramount. The conversion fine levies is Rs. 37,66,851/- Establishment charge Rs. 14,85,485 and Audit charges of Rs. 1,48,548/-. Again on 25-9-1989 another letter was issued demanding covers fine and establishment charges of Rs.65,25,900/- .It is submitted that the petition schedule lands are all Urban Lands and have cease to be agriculture lands by force of statute. The provisions of Karnataka Land Revenue Act are not applicable and conversion fine demanded by invoking the provisions of the KLR Act is illegal and without authority of law.

[3] 1990 : As the respondents were insisting on the payment of the conversion charges and Establishment charges, the petitioner filed Writ petition No. 2382/90 [File Code: 026.06 WritPetion .2382 of 1990 ] [File Code: 026.08 Stay Order in WP 2382 of 90 ] , before the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore During the pendency of the Writ Petition the petitioners gave up their plea relating to payment of Establishment charge and Audit Charges. The said Writ petition was heard along with other Writ Petitions involving identical questions. True copy of Writ Petition dated 1-2-1990 is files as Annexure P-1A

[4] 11-11-1996 : Common order passed by the learned Sing Judge of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore. The High Court held that though the land are shown in the CDP for residential use but in view of the . And Sec.14(2) of Kt & P Act 1961, any person who intends to have the change of lands use is required to obtain permission from the Deputy Commissioner to use the agricultural lands for non-agricultural purposes u/s. 95 of the KLR Act and they are required to pay conversion fine as contemplated therein. The High Court accordingly dismissed the Writ Petitions. True copy of the order passed by the Learned Single Judge, dated 11-11-1996 is filed herewith and worked as Annexure P-2. [File Code : 026.09 WP2382 of 90 Jment ]

[5] 16-1-1997 : Being aggrieved by the above Order, the petitioners preferred writ Appeals No. 138/97 before the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore. True copy of the Memorandum of Appeal filed before the High Court is filed herewith and marked as Annexure-P-3. The Writ Appeal was heard along with the other connected writ appeals.

[6] 25-6-1997 : Common Impugned Judgment and Order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court. The Division Bench held that the definition of Urban land as given in the ULC Act cannot be deemed to be definition of the Land under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act particularly, when action is initiated in terms of Section 95 read with Rule 107 framed under the Act. The High Court also rejected the other contentions of the petitioners and confirmed the Order passed by the Learned Single Judge. [File Code: 026.04 Jmnt in WA]

1999 : The instant Special Leave Petitions is filed.