The High Court of Karnataka has held that the reservation of the land on which the Jayamahal Palace Hotel stands as "reserved for the purposes of parks and green spaces," under the Revised Master Plan 2015 in 2007 has lapsed.
Since the acquisition of the land under the RMP was not made within five years, the HC held that the designation had lapsed from the midnight of June 24, 2012.
The property, earlier in the Oobarpad village, Ulsoor Hobli, Bengaluru was designated under new survey numbers of Jayamahal Main Road in Comprehensive Development Plan 2011 (CDP) approved in 1995. It is owned by the heirs of Jyotendra Sinhji Vikramsinhjji, the erstwhile royal family of the Gondal State.
Advertisement
"It is declared that the designation of the land of the petitioners for parks and green spaces, sports/playgrounds, cemeteries/burial ground in the Revised Master Plan, 2015 is deemed to have lapsed from midnight of 24.06.2012," Justice Suraj Govindaraj said in his judgement on December 15 on a petition filed by Maharani Kumud Kumari and Maharaja Shri Himanshusinhji.
The HC said that the acquisition process was not completed in the designated time period leading to the lapse.
"The land of the petitioners having been designated for public use in terms of Clause (c) of subsection (1) of Section 12 of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning (KTCP) Act under the Revised Master Plan which came into effect on 25.06.2007, such designation is deemed to have lapsed from the midnight of 24.06.2012 since no acquisition has been made of the said land in terms of Subsection (1) or Subsection (2) of Section 69 of the KTCP Act," the HC held.
Advertisement
The petition claimed that in the CDP of the year 2011 which was approved in 1995, the aforesaid land was earmarked for usage for residential purposes. But in the RMP 2015 approved in 2007, it was changed and reserved for “purposes of parks and green spaces, sports/playgrounds, cemeteries/burial ground,” and classified as a "green belt/ zone." This was challenged before the HC in the petition filed in 2015. The HC gave its judgement recently.
The HC said that the reservation "would lapse after a period of five years in terms of Subsection (2) of Section 69 of the KTCP Act, if the same were not acquired within the said period by agreement or by initiating proceedings under the Right To Fair Compensation And Transparency In Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation And Resettlement Act, 2013."
