In response to a petition from CNC Mangalore-Kavoor Project Pvt Ltd, Karnataka High Court has affirmed that authorities must acquire land owned by private individuals through Section 69 of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning (KTCP) Act, 1961. The ruling underscores the legal obligation for proper acquisition procedures, restricting the use of private land for public projects. The decision establishes a precedent for adherence to the statutory framework in land acquisition, emphasizing the importance of due process and regulatory compliance in such matters.
The Karnataka High Court has ruled that a landowner is entitled to transferable development rights (TDR) for land given up to widen an existing comprehensive development plan (CDP) road outside or on the periphery of a layout. The decision came in response to a petition filed by CNC Mangalore-Kavoor Project Pvt Ltd. Justice Suraj Govindaraj, presiding over the case, emphasized that authorities can only utilize land owned by private individuals through acquisition under Section 69 of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning (KTCP) Act, 1961.
The Hyderabad-based company which owns approximately 19 acres in Kavoor, Mangalore taluk, had its layout plan sanctioned by the Mangalore Urban Development Authority (MUDA) on January 19, 2022. The company was directed to relinquish internal roads, parks, civic amenities, and a portion of land on the east and west sides to widen an existing 18-meter road. The company had fulfilled this requirement.
However, on February 5, 2023, MUDA issued an endorsement refusing to grant TDR for the relinquished land, citing the absence of provisions under Section 14B(20) of the KTCP Act. Challenging this decision, the company argued that the relinquishment deed was executed with the expectation that TDR would be issued under CDP and zonal regulations for land used to widen the road. While the company acknowledged that TDR cannot be claimed for internal roads, MUDA insisted on the surrender of such land free of cost as a prerequisite for granting a sanction plan.
Justice Govindaraj, after reviewing the provisions of the KTCP Act, ruled against MUDA. The judge emphasized that Section 14B(20) of the KTCP Act does not pertain to widening an existing road outside the layout but is applicable only to areas earmarked within the layout for roads, parks, common open spaces, and civic amenities. Consequently, the judge directed MUDA to issue the necessary recommendation/consent for TDR in respect of the petitioner's land used to widen the existing road.
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
