Sri N Gangadhar Vs the State of Karnataka

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER KIADB-II (BMICP) AND BENGALURU RURAL, NO. 14/3, CFC BUILDING, MAHARSHI ARAVIND BHAVAN, 1^ST FLOOR, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶16

THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO. 49, 5^TH FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVAN, EAST WING, RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶17

THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KIADB, NO.49, 5^TH FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVAN, EAST WING,

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:117 WP No. 35080 of 2024

¶20

RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SMT. SUKANYA BALIGA AGA FOR R1; SRI. P.V. CHANDRA SHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED AWARD VIDE KIADB/LAQ/1387/2022-23 DATED 12.01.2023 ANNEXURE-E PASSED BY R-2 AND APPROVED BY R-4 AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH NOTICE DATED 20.04.2023 ANNEXURE-D AND ETC.

¶24

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

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

Sri. P.V. Chandrashekar, learned counsel submits that he

¶28

has filed vakalath for respondent Nos.2 to 4.

¶29

Petitioner claiming to be the owner of land in Sy.No.68/6 measuring 1 acre, of Obalapura Village, Thyamagondlu Hobli, Nelamangla Taluk which has been acquired by respondent No.3 for MNLP Project is before this Court in this petition seeking quash of award dated 12.01.2023 passed by respondent No.2 and approved by the respondent No.4 and consequently quash of notice dated 20.04.2023 and for direction to the respondents to pass the award under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013

¶30

3 -

¶31

NC: 2025:KHC:117 WP No. 35080 of 2024

¶32

and for further direction to pass award in terms of Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966.

¶33

Learned counsel for the petitioner on instruction submits that the petitioner does not wish to seek relief at prayer column-(b) and would restrict the petition to prayer columns (a) and (c).

¶34

Learned counsel for the respondents-KIADB submits that since there was a private dispute with regard to the property subject matter of the petition, general award as per Annexure-E has been passed and now that the dispute has been resolved in terms of the order dated 15.10.2024 passed in O.S.No.279/2021 and that since the petitioner is ready and willing to accept the compensation in terms of the Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966, his representation in this regard will be considered in accordance with law.

¶35

Submissions taken on record.

¶36

Accordingly, following:

¶37

4 -

¶38

NC: 2025:KHC:117 WP No. 35080 of 2024

¶39

ORDER

¶40

(i). Writ petition is allowed in part.

¶41

(ii). Impugned General Award dated 12.01.2023 produced at Annexure-E passed by the respondent No.3-KIADB insofar as the property of the petitioner herein is concerned, is hereby quashed.

¶42

(iii). Respondent No.3 is directed to consider the case of the petitioner herein in terms of the Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966, upon the petitioner satisfying all the requirement thereof. Needless to state that in the event of any dispute, the general award would stand restored.

¶43

(iv). Respondent No.3 is directed to withdraw the amount in deposit before the Competent Court, if any, and disburse to the petitioner herein, in terms of the observation made above, in accordance with law.

¶44

SD/(M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE

¶45

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32

¶46

RL

Sri N Gangadhar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri N Gangadhar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Syed Adil Basha Quadri Vs Syed Azadullah

The Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board Vs K v Forgings Pvt. Ltd.

Axis Bank Ltd. Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Dr. Naveen S L Vs the Commissioner

Muniyamma Vs State of Karnataka

V Ramaiah Vs State of Karnataka