Mrs T G Shanthamma Vs the State of Karnataka

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER OFFICE-2, NO.39, SHANTHI GRUHA, BHARATH SCOUTS AND GUIDES BUILDING, 4^TH FLOOR, PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER.

¶20

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, K.I.A.D.B. NO.45, 5^TH FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVAN,

¶21

BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-560 001.

¶22

THE MALLESHWARAM CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NO.102, 7TH CROSS, EAST PARK ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU-560 003.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. P.V. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3; SRI. K.V. LOKESH, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE R2 KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, TO PAY ENTIRE COMPENSATION TO THE PETITIONERS FOR HAVING ACQUIRED THE LAND IN SY. NO. 207, MEASURING 2 ACRES 30 GUNTAS SITUATED AT HULIKUNTE VILLAGE, DODDABELAVANGALA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK NOTIFICATION DATED 22.07.2021 AS PER ANNEXURE-A.

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

3 -

¶29

NC: 2025:KHC:355 WP No. 6301 of 2024

¶30

ORAL ORDER

¶31

Present petition is filed by the petitioners claiming to be the owners of land in Sy.No.207, situated at Hulikunte village, Doddabelavangala Hobli, Doddaballapura Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District, subject matter of acquisition vide notification dated 22.07.2021 issued by the respondent No.1 under Section 28(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (for short 'Act, 1966') seeking following reliefs;

¶32

"a) Issue a Writ of mandamus directing the Respondent No.2 Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board, to pay entire compensation to the petitioners for having acquired the land in sy. No. 207, measuring 2 Acres 30 guntas situated at Hulikunte Village, Doddabelavangala Hobli, Doddaballapura Taluk as per Annexure -A.

¶33

b) Writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the loss/additional expenditure due to delay in acquisition.

¶34

c) Issue writ of mandamus directing the Respondent to De-notify the Sy.No.207, measuring 2 Acres 30 guntas situated at Doddaballapura Taluk, Doddabelavengala Hobli, Hulikunte Village, Bengaluru Rural District Schedule property intended to be acquired by the Respondent No.2 and 3.

¶35

(d) Issue writ of mandamus directing the Respondent to acquire only 26 Guntas as per JMC sketch and report dated:20.03.2024 in sy.No.207, out of measuring 2 Acres 30 guntas, situated at Doddaballapura Taluk Doddabelavangala Hobli, Hulikunte Village, Bengaluru Rural District, Schedule Property and delete the extent of 2 Acres 04 Guntas by the Respondent No.2 and 3".

¶36

4 -

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC:355 WP No. 6301 of 2024

¶38

Counsel appearing for the respondent No.1-State as

¶39

well as counsel appearing for the respondent No.2-KIADB in unison submit that the compensation could not be determined and paid earlier since the Final Notification had not been issued. It is submitted that now Final Notification has been issued and published on 30.12.2024, in terms of which, out of 2 acres 30 guntas of land in Sy.No.207, only an extent of 26 guntas has been notified and that compensation in respect of the same would be determined and paid to the petitioners in accordance with law.

¶40

A copy of the Final Notification is produced. Perusal of the same would indicate that at Sl.No.26 an extent of 26 guntas of land in Sy.No.207 has been acquired.

¶41

Therefore, petitioners are at liberty to approach respondent No.2-KIADB. The respondent No.2-KIADB shall pay compensation to the extent of land acquired as per the final notification. Respondent No.2 is directed to consider the case of the petitioners herein in terms of Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966, upon petitioners satisfying all the requirement thereof.

¶42

5 -

¶43

NC: 2025:KHC:355 WP No. 6301 of 2024

¶44

5. Needless to state that the respondent No.2-KIADB

¶45

is at liberty to pass award in accordance with law. Such exercise shall be undertaken and the amount be disbursed to the petitioners within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. Petitioners are at liberty to seek such remedy as available under law with regard to remaining extent of land.

¶46

With the above observation, petition is disposed of.

¶47

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

¶48

RU, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42

Mrs T G Shanthamma v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs T G Shanthamma 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 Govindaraju Vs Deputy Commissioner

Sri H Ravi Vs State of Karnataka

Sri N Gangadhar Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Muniyappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri M. Prabhakar Vs the Commissioner

Smt Praneshwari P K Vs the Bengaluru Development Authority