Another tangle in BMIC knot

Another tangle in BMIC knot
Deccan Herald

The controversy over the Bangalore-Mysore Infrastructure Corridor (BMIC) project has taken a new turn with several landowners seeking return of their land while alleging that the government had acquired excess land in violation of the judgments of the High Court and the Supreme Court...

The controversy over the Bangalore-Mysore Infrastructure Corridor (BMIC) project has taken a new turn with several landowners seeking return of their land while alleging that the government had acquired excess land in violation of the judgments of the High Court and the Supreme Court.

Contrary to the claim of Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprises (NICE) which has been stating that all the judgements were in its favour, the landowners have now claimed that the verdicts clearly disapproved the demand for the “excess land” made by NICE. Several landowners have also shot off legal notices to the government through their advocates threatening that they would move the appropriate court if the authorities failed to annul the acquisition of “excess land” and restore the land in their favour. The government had acquired and handed over the land to NICE in excess of the requirement as mentioned in the Frame Work Agreement of the project in violation of the court orders, they have alleged. The landowners were banking on the direction given by the High Court in 1998 relating to a public interest litigation filed by one Mr Somashekara Reddy who had questioned the Frame Work Agreement signed by the government with the NICE.

The court had upheld the FWA and put the extent of land, required for the expressway project at about 6,999 acres. While acting on the recent petitions during 2005-06, the High Court and the Supreme Court had directed the government to execute the BMIC project as conceived originally and as upheld by the High Court in Somashekara Reddy’s case. This direction, the landowners have claimed, had not approved the extent of land sought by the NICE subsequent to the 1998 judgment.

The High Court in the 1998 verdict had approved the acquisition of a total of 6,999 acres of land — 4,528 acres for the 111-km expressway between Bangalore and Mysore and toll plazas along it; 2,193 acres for the 41-km peripheral road and 278 acres for the 9.8-km link road. Hence, only 2,471 acres of land was required for the project around Bangalore, they have claimed in the legal notice quoting the verdict.

The High Court and the apex court, the landowners have pointed out, in the recent verdicts have specifically asked the government to implement the project as conceived originally and as upheld in the 1998 verdict.

According to them, this direction has clearly disapproved of acquisition of land for the peripheral and link road around Bangalore beyond the extent of land approved by the HC in 1998.They have pointed out that the government had acquired 2,471 acres as per the FWA around Bangalore during 1998-99 itself and hence the lands acquired after 1999 were in violation of the judgments.

A NICE ROW

*NICE has been claiming that all judgements were in its favour

* Landowners say courts have spiked NICE’s “excess land”

demand

* According to them, the govt has given excess land to NICE in violation of the framework agreement