Sri Renukaiah Vs the State of Kanataka

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:18590 WP No. 13640 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 13640 OF 2025 (LA-KIADB)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. RENUKAIAH, S/O LATE GOURAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT SHINGIHALLI VILLAGE, VEMGAL HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT.

¶9

SMT. MEENAKSHAMMA, W/O LATE SHIVAKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT SHINGIHALLI VILLAGE, VEMGAL HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT.

¶10

Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶11

SRI. PARAMESH S/O LATE SHIVAKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/AT SHINGIHALLI VILLAGE,

¶12

VEMGAL HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT.

¶13

SRI. RUDRESH S/O LATE SHIVAKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT SHINGIHALLI VILLAGE, VEMGAL HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT.

¶14

SRI. S.G. MALLIKARJUNAIAH S/O LATE GOWRAIAH,

¶15

2 -

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC:18590 WP No. 13640 of 2025

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

R/AT SHINGIHALLI VILLAGE, VEMGAL HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT.

¶19

SRI. S.G. NAGATARAJA S/O LATE GOWRAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT SHINGIHALLI VILLAGE, VEMGAL HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT.

¶20

SRI. S.G.KUMAR, S/O LATE GOWRAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT SHINGIHALLI VILLAGE, VEMGAL HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT.

¶21

SMT. VANAJAKSHI W/O CHANDRASHEKAR, D/O LATE GOWRAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT KEMBLINGANAHALLI VILLAGE, HOSAKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

¶22

SMT. HEMALATHA D/O LATE GOWRAIAH, W/O NEELAKANTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT YATHAKKI VILLAGE, NANDAGUDI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

¶23

…PETITIONERS

¶24

(BY SMT. LATHA S.S, ADVOCATE)

¶25

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:18590 WP No. 13640 of 2025

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

AND:

¶28

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶29

THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER, NO 14/3, II FLOOR, R. P. BUILDING, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶30

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, I FLOOR, R.P. BUILDING, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶31

…RESPONDENTS

¶32

(BY SRI. SESHU V, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. H.L. PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)

¶33

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE GENERAL AWARD DATED 12.07.2017 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN NO KIADB LAQ. 2017-18 WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-E TO THE WRIT PETITION IN SO FAR PETITIONERS LAND BEARING SY NO.79, MEASURING 0-13 GUNTAS, SITUATED AT SHINGIHALLI VILLAGE, VEMAGAL HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK, IS CONCERNED AND ETC.,

¶34

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶35

4 -

¶36

NC: 2025:KHC:18590 WP No. 13640 of 2025

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶39

ORAL ORDER

¶40

The petitioners are before this court seeking the following

¶41

prayers:

¶42

"i) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the general award dated 12.07.2017 passed by the respondent no.3 in No KIADB LAQ: 2017-18 which is produced at ANNEXUREE to the writ petition in so far petitioner's land bearing Sy.No.79, measuring 0-13 guntas, situated at Shingihalli Village, Vemagal Hobli, Kolar Taluk, is concerned.

¶43

ii) Issue any suitable order, direction or writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents herein to consider the case of the petitioners as per section 29(2) of the KIAD Act which also includes the cash compensation or the allotment of the developed sites in lieu of the cash compensation.

¶44

iii) Issue any other orders or directions as deemed fit in the circumstances attending."

¶45

Heard Smt.Latha S.S., learned counsel for the petitioners, learned HCGP for respondent No.1 and

¶46

Sril.H.L.Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

¶47

The challenge is to the General Award dated 12.07.2017. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks to place reliance upon the judgment rendered by the Coordinate Bench

¶48

5 -

¶49

NC: 2025:KHC:18590 WP No. 13640 of 2025

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

in identical circumstances to buttress her submission with

¶52

regard to the quashment of the General Award so passed. The Coordinate Bench in W.P.No.16220 of 2023 disposed on 31.07.2023, has held as follows:

¶53

"Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a general award has been passed only on the ground that the petitioner was absent when the matter was heard by the Special Land Acquisition Officer for award of compensation, as could be seen in the discussions made in the general award dated 06.06.2023 at Annexure-A. Learned counsel submits that this Court has held in several matters including the recent decision in the case of Harisha.R /vs./ State of Karnataka and others in W.P.No.12703/2023 dated 27.06.2023 following an earlier decision in W.P.No.6198/2015, that the land loser would be entitled for a better price as compensation instead determination under a general award. As a consequence all such matters where it was found that a general award was passed only on some technical ground that the land loser was not present at the time of hearing or such other technical reasons, this Court was of the considered opinion that since the land loser would get a better price if the compensation is awarded in terms of the agreement and not under a general award, the award may be passed in terms of an agreement. Therefore, the learned counsel submits that similar benefit should be given to the petitioner.

¶54

On going through several of the following judgments which were rendered by this Court:

¶55

i) Smt. Rukmani v/s State of Karnataka - W.P No.39611-39612/2016 dated 16.09.2016;

¶56

ii) Sri.Basavaraju vs. State of Karnataka - W.P.No.34071/2017 dated 28.08.2017;

¶57

6 -

¶58

NC: 2025:KHC:18590 WP No. 13640 of 2025

¶59

HC-KAR

¶60

iii) Sri.Rajanna vs. State of Karnataka - W.P.No.51362/2016 dated 21.03.2018;

¶61

iv) Smt.Ningamma vs. state of Karnataka - W.P.No.6198/2015 dated 25.08.2015;

¶62

v) Sri.Bhyraiah vs. State of Karnataka - W.P.No.40896/2017 dated 24.01.2019;

¶63

this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner

¶64

is entitled for similar relief as was given in the cases mentioned above.

¶65

Consequently, the following:

¶66

ORDER

¶67

(i) The writ petition is allowed.

¶68

(ii) The impugned general award dated 06.06.2023 at Annexure-A insofar as the petitioner’s land is concerned is set aside.

¶69

(iii) The respondent Special Land Acquisition Officer of the KIADB is directed to reconsider the request of the petitioner for award of compensation by way of an agreement under Section 29(2) of the KIADB Act and pass necessary orders within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶70

(iv) The respondent – Special Land Acquisition Officer, KIADB, is at liberty to withdraw the amount that has been deposited by it pursuant to the general award before the jurisdictional court.

¶71