22 hours ago
1
The High Court of Karnataka has upheld the law validity of the provisions of the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB) Act, 1964, which enables the BWSSB to spot and support sewer over, under, on oregon crossed immoderate immovable property, including backstage ones, without acquisition of the land.
Referring to Section 39 (power to laic mains), 76 (buildings and backstage streets not to beryllium erected oregon constructed implicit sewers without permission) and 77 (rights of idiosyncratic of spot for sewers), the tribunal said that these “provisions represent a constitutionally valid statutory model creating a constricted statutory close of user, accompanied by procedural and compensatory safeguards”.
Justice Suraj Govindaraj passed the bid portion partially allowing the petitions filed by landowners, T.N. Chandrashekar Gowda, Jethronica and others, who had challenged the usage of their lands for laying sewer by the BWSSB.
Pointing retired that the provisions of the Act requires the BWSSB to origin arsenic small harm arsenic imaginable and mandates afloat compensation for harm caused, the tribunal said that “the statutory scheme, therefore, does not contemplate unrestricted concern oregon appropriation of land...”
“If acquisition proceedings were made mandatory each clip a sewer enactment crossed backstage land, the applicable effect would beryllium fragmentation of infrastructure projects and important impairment of the implementation of indispensable civic works,” the tribunal observed.
However, the tribunal made it wide the law validity of these provisions are sustained connected the knowing that safeguards provided successful the Act are applied meaningfully and that compensation remains existent and responsive to the existent prejudice suffered by affected landowners.
The tribunal clarified that the statutory close of idiosyncratic nether Section 77, adjacent if it causes ongoing restrictions oregon inconvenience to the owner, does not automatically pb to compulsory acquisition of spot requiring acquisition proceedings and market-value compensation nether the 2013 Act successful each case, arsenic close granted to the BWSSB is lone a constricted close of use, not a transportation of ownership.
Meanwhile, the tribunal asked the BWSSB to assess, find and wage compensation, if any, payable to the respective petitioners for existent damage, whether imperishable oregon impermanent portion rejecting plea for removal of sewer from their backstage lands.
