Sri.P.Nagaraju Vs the State of Karnataka

SRI. P. NAGARAJU S/O. LATE. PAPANNA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, RESIDING AT BASHETTIHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 561203

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. SHARAN N. MAJAGE, ADVOCATE)

¶12

Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

AND:

¶14

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

¶15

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER, KHANIJA BHAVANA,

¶16

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:33456 WP No. 24066 of 2025

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶19

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-2, KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, NO.14/3, 1ST FLOOR, CFC BUILDING, MAHARSHI ARAVINDA BHAVAN, NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. M. RAJAKUMAR, AGA FOR R1; SRI. H.L. PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)

¶22

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF

¶23

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO 1) ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE GENERAL AWARD DATED 14.09.2011 BEARING NO. KIADB/BHUSWAAH//2011-12 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 IN RESPECT OF LAND IN SY.NO.65/1 MEASURING 28 GUNTAS, SITUATED AT BASHETTIHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER LAND IS CONCERNED, WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G AND ETC.,

¶24

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY

¶25

HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶26

3 -

¶27

NC: 2025:KHC:33456 WP No. 24066 of 2025

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶30

ORAL ORDER

¶31

The petitioner is at the doors of this Court calling in question seeking quashment of the General Award dated 14.09.2011, passed by respondent No.3 in respect of land in Sy.No.65/1 measuring 28 guntas, situated at Bashettihalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Doddaballapura Taluk, Bangalore Rural District qua the petitioner.

¶32

Heard Shri. Sharan N. Majage, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Shri M. Rajakumar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent No.1 and Shri. H. L. Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.2 and 3, and have perused the material on record.

¶33

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue in the lis at hand is identical to the issue that is considered by a co-ordinate bench in W.P.No.36514/2024 (LA-KIADB), disposed on 05.02.2025.

¶34

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:33456 WP No. 24066 of 2025

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

Therefore, he seeks the same relief as is granted in the aforesaid writ petition.

¶37

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents also admits that the issue in the lis is identical to the issue considered in W.P.No.36514/2024.

¶38

The Coordinate Bench of this Court in

¶39

W.P.No.36514/2024 (LA-KIADB), disposed on 05.02.2025, has held as follows:

¶40

"The petitioner claiming to be the absolute owner of land bearing Sy.No.60 (JMC Block No.22) measuring 1 acre situated at Bairadenahalli village, Kundanan Hobli, Devanahalli Taluka, Bengaluru District, which has been acquired by the respondent-KIADB in terms of the provisions of Section 28 of KIADB act is before this Court seeking following relief:

¶41

"1) Issue writ of certiorari quashing the General Award bearing No. KIADB/LAQ/626/2023-24 dated: 24.05.2023 passed by the Respondent No. 3 in respect of land in Sy.No. 60 (JMC Block No.22) measuring 1 Acre of land situated at Bairadenahalli Village, Kundana Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, Bangalore Rural District, in so far as the Petitioner is concerned, which is produced as ANNEXURE-E.

¶42

ii) Issue any suitable order, direction or writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent herein to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of developed land as per as per in the industrial layout formed by acquiring the land of the petitioner. on the lines of the G.O dated 13.05 2008 bearing No. CI 495 SPQ 2008 marked, as ANNEXURE-F, the G.O dated 13.08.2007 bearing No. CI 417 SPQ 2007

¶43

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:33456 WP No. 24066 of 2025

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

marked as ANNEXURE-G and the latest GO dated 23.02.2021 bearing No. 103 SPQ (E) 2019 marked as ANNEXURE-H.

¶46

iii) Pass such other order, writ or direction as the Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case including costs."

¶47

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the general award has been passed. However, in view of the government order dated 13.05.2008 produced at Annexures-F, G & H, the petitioner is also entitled for developed land in the industrial layout formed by the respondent-KIADB. Hence, seeks for quashing of the general award and for a direction to respondent-KIADB to consider his requisition/representation for allotment of developed land in lieu of the monetary compensation as per the government order dated 13.05.2008.

¶48

Learned counsel for the respondent-KIADB on the other hand does not dispute that in terms of the government order dated 23.02.2021, which is the current government order, governing the field, petitioner would be entitled for developed land in the industrial layout formed by the KIADB in view of monetary compensation. He submits if a representation in this regard is made by the petitioner, the same will be considered in accordance with law.

¶49

Submission is taken on record. Accordingly, the following:

¶50

ORDER

¶51

i) The writ petition is allowed.

¶52

ii) The general award bearing No.KIADB/LAQ/626/2023-24 dated 24.05.2023 passed respondent No.3 in respect of land bearing Sy.No.60 (JMC Block No.22) measuring 1 acre situated at Bairadenahalli village, Kundana Hobli, Devanahalli Taluka, Bengaluru District, is hereby quashed.

¶53

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:33456 WP No. 24066 of 2025

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

iii) The petition shall make a fresh representation within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy this order, thereupon the respondent-KIADB to consider the same in terms of the government order referred to in the writ petition at annexure-H.

¶56

iv) Such exercise shall be done with an outer limit of eight weeks from the date of submission of representation by the petitioner.

¶57

v) The respondent-KIADB is at liberty to withdraw the amount in deposit, if any."

¶58

In the light of the afore-quoted judgment and the identical facts, the petitioner is also entitled for the similar relief.

¶59

For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

¶60

ORDER

¶61

i) The Writ Petition is allowed.

¶62

ii) Impugned General Award dated 14.09.2011, passed by respondent No.3, stands quashed qua the petitioner.

¶63

iii) The petitioner shall make a fresh representation within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, thereupon the respondent-KIADB to consider the same in terms of the Government Orders dated 13.08.2007, 13.05.2008 and

¶64

NC: 2025:KHC:33456 WP No. 24066 of 2025

¶65