“Government Cannot Act As Robber Of Citizens’ Lands”: Karnataka High Court

Quoting St Augustine from his 5th century book ‘The City of God,’ the Court said, “Without justice, what else is the State but a great band of robbers?”

Coming down heavily on the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (KIADB), the High Court of Karnataka has said that the government cannot “act as robbers”. Quoting St Augustine from his 5th century book ‘The City of God,’ the Court said, “Without justice, what else is the State but a great band of robbers?”

Petitioners M V Guruprasad and Nandini Gururpasad approached the High Court against the acquisition of their land by KIADB in 2007. Initially, their names were missing from the acquisition notification. It took them seven years to get the government to issue a corrigendum in 2014 and include their names.

However, no compensation has been paid to them ever since.

“There is no plausible explanation as to why the payment of compensation is withheld for a decade and half,” Justice Krishna S Dixit said in his recent judgment.

Though the challenge to land acquisition was rejected by the Court, it ordered that the compensation should be re-fixed at the rate of 50 per cent computed under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The KIADB was also directed to pay a cost of ₹ 25,000 per acre to the petitioners.

Coming down heavily on the authorities, the High Court in its judgment said, “The government cannot act as a robber of citizens’ lands; taking away private lands for the purported public purpose sans compensation militates against the spirit of constitutional guarantee enacted under Article 300A, the fundamental right to property no longer being on the statute book, notwithstanding.”

Five acres and one gunta of land of Guruprasad and 38 guntas of land in the name of his wife Nandini were acquired by the KIADB. Sites were formed on it and the court noted that after allotment these have fetched ₹ 7.5 crore to the KIADB, “that too, with the rebate rate of 50 percent of the market value.”

The non-payment of compensation and the “conduct reinforces the shackles of a feudalistic attitude from which the transformative character of our constitution seeks to liberate. Their action in not paying the compensation is not only grossly violative of property rights constitutionally guaranteed under Article 300A but gnaws at overarching objectives of a Welfare State ordained under the Constitution,” the court said.

It directed the authorities to compute and pay the compensation along with an additional interest at 12 per cent per annum.

“It hardly needs to be stated that the State and its instrumentalities are constitutionally expected to conduct themselves with fairness and reasonableness in all their actions. The conduct of the Respondent – KIADB and its officials who answer the description of ‘State’ under Article 12 of the Constitution falls militantly short of the fairness standards expected of them,” the HC said.

Quoting a 1904 US case (Justice Oliver Wendell Homes in Davis Vs Mills), the High Court said, “Constitutions are intended to preserve practical and substantial rights, not to maintain theories.” The court also expressed “its deep anguish against the culpable action of Respondent-KIADB and its officials in putting the petitioner-land-losers to a great hardship and misery.”