Sri R Ramaiah Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Sri R Ramaiah Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition allowed: general award dated 13.09.2024 (Annexure-B) set aside insofar as the petitioner's land (Sy.No.122/1, 12 guntas, Machanahalli Village) is concerned; respondent No.3 directed to consider the claim and pass a consent award under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act within four months; general award to revive upon any dispute as to entitlement/apportionment; liberty to SLAO-KIADB to withdraw amount deposited before the Civil Court.

Issue for consideration

Whether the general award dated 13.09.2024 (Annexure-B) should be set aside/quashed insofar as it relates to the petitioner's land bearing Sy.No.122/1 (12 guntas), Machanahalli Village, and whether the authorities should be directed to consider a consent award under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act. +1 more

Court's answer

The impugned general award at Annexure-B, insofar as the petitioner's land is concerned, is set aside.

Ratio / Principle

Respondent No.3 is directed to consider the petitioner's claim and pass a consent award in terms of Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act within four months from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

Key takeaways

In the event of any dispute with regard to entitlement and apportionment of the award amount, the general award at Annexure-B would stand revived.ratio¶¶44
Liberty is reserved to the Special Land Acquisition Officer, KIADB to withdraw the amount, if deposited before the Civil Court pursuant to the general award.ratio¶¶46

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

KIADB acquisition – general award dated 13.09.2024 (Annexure-B, No. KIADB/LAQ/727/2024-25) passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer-I (BMICP), KIADB, set aside insofar as it relates to the petitioner's land bearing Sy.No.122/1 measuring 12 guntas at Machanahalli Village, Sompura Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District – petitioner claiming to have been willing for a consent award – taking note of earlier directions in W.P.No.15026/2021 and the stand of counsel for KIADB, respondent No.3 directed to consider the petitioner's claim and pass a consent award in terms of Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 within four months – clarification that the general award would stand revived in the event of any dispute as to entitlement and apportionment of the award amount – liberty reserved to the SLAO, KIADB to withdraw the amount, if deposited before the Civil Court pursuant to the general award – petition allowed and disposed of (Single Judge, S Sunil Dutt Yadav, J.).

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21913 WP No. 11962 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF APRIL, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 11962 OF 2026 (LA-KIADB)

BETWEEN:

SRI. R. RAMAIAH S/O M.C. RAMAKRISHNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/A MACHANAHALLI VILLAGE, SOMPURA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562 111.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. VIRUPAKSHAIAH P.H., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560 001.

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, A GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA UNDERTAKING, NO. 14/3, 2^ND FLOOR, RP BUILDING, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS JOINT DIRECTOR AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21913 WP No. 11962 of 2026

HC-KAR

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-I, (BMICP) AND BENGALURU RURAL, NELAMANGALA TALUK, KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, NO. 14/3, 2^ND FLOOR, RP BUILDING, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, AGA FOR R1; SRI. VASANTHA, ADV. FOR R2 AND R3)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE SIMILAR NATURE QUASHING THE IMPUGNED GENERAL AWARD DATED 13.09.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-B BEARING NO. KIADB/LAQ/727/2024-25 PASSED BY THE 3^RD RESPONDENT AUTHORITY INSOFAR AS IT RELATES TO THE LAND OWNED BY THE PETITIONER BEARING SY. NO. 122/1 MEASURING TO AN EXTENT OF 12 GUNTAS SITUATED AT MACHANAHALLI VILLAGE, SOMPURA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT AND ETC.,

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:21913 WP No. 11962 of 2026

HC-KAR

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has sought for setting aside of the general award dated 13.09.2024 insofar as it relates to the property of the petitioner bearing Sy.No.122/1 measuring to an extent of 12 guntas situated at Machanahalli Village, Sompura Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk, Bangalore Rural District and has sought for further direction in the nature of mandamus to the authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for award of compensation by way of an agreement in terms of Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966.

The case of the petitioner is that he was willing for a consent award and accordingly, the question of passing of general award does not arise.

Learned counsel for the respondent - Karnataka

Industrial Area Development Board (KIADB) submits that the petition itself could be disposed of while setting aside the general award insofar as the petitioner is concerned

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:21913 WP No. 11962 of 2026

HC-KAR

and the respondent - Special Land Acquisition Officer, KIADB would consider the request of the petitioner and pass a consent award as per law.

In light of the said stand, taking note of the

directions passed in W.P.No.15026/2021, the petition is disposed of as follows:

(i) The petition is allowed.

(ii) The impugned general award at Annexure-B insofar as the petitioner's land is concerned, is set aside.

(iii) Respondent No.3 is directed to consider the claim of the petitioner for passing of consent award and pass a consent award in terms of Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

It is made clear that, in the event if there is any

dispute with regard to entitlement and apportionment of

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:21913 WP No. 11962 of 2026

HC-KAR

the award amount, the general award at Annexure-B would stand revived.

Liberty is reserved to the Special Land

Acquisition Officer, KIADB to withdraw the amount, if deposited before the Civil Court pursuant to the general award.

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of in

terms of the above.

Sd/(S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

MCR