Dr. Nagashree K M Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2026)

Dr. Nagashree K M Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The Preliminary Notification dated 03.04.2006 at Annexure-A and the acquisition proceedings pursuant thereto were declared abandoned and lapsed and were quashed insofar as the petitioner's schedule property is concerned; the petition was disposed of on the same terms as W.P.No.28873/2025.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Preliminary Notification dated 03.04.2006 (Annexure-A) and the acquisition proceedings initiated thereunder by MUDA should be declared abandoned and lapsed and quashed insofar as the petitioner's property is concerned, given that no further steps were taken after the notification, on parity with W.P.No.28873/2025 (which in turn followed C. Bhaskaran, WP.No.7505/2014).

Court's answer

Taking note that after the preliminary notification no steps have been taken to effectuate the acquisition proceedings, the Preliminary Notification dated 03.04.2006 (Annexure-A) and the acquisition proceedings pursuant thereto are declared to have been abandoned and lapsed.

Ratio / Principle

The Preliminary Notification dated 03.04.2006 (Annexure-A) and the acquisition proceedings pursuant thereto are quashed insofar as the property of the petitioner is concerned.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 7324 of 2026 (LA-UDA) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, decided on 09.03.2026 by S Sunil Dutt Yadav J, High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru. Dr. Nagashree K M challenged the preliminary notification dated 03.04.2006 bearing No. LAQ(5)CR 540/2005-06 (Annexure-A) issued by Respondent No.2, Mysore Urban Development Authority, proposing acquisition of land in Kurubarahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk for formation of a residential layout; the petitioner also pleaded in the alternative that the proceedings had lapsed upon commencement of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. Since no further steps had been taken after the notification, and taking note of the order in W.P.No.28873/2025 (Yasmin Achaiah v. state of Karnataka and others, disposed of 07.11.2025), which itself rested on Shri C. Bhaskaran v. State of Karnataka (WP.No.7505/2014 (LA-UDA), decided 17.11.2020), the Court declared the preliminary notification dated 03.04.2006 and the acquisition proceedings pursuant thereto abandoned and lapsed and quashed them insofar as the petitioner's property was concerned, and disposed of the petition on the same terms. The alternative 2013 Act plea was not separately adjudicated. Note: at paras 36 and 55 the order records the notification date as '03.04.2026', while the prayer and the operative declaration read '03.04.2006'.

NC: 2026:KHC:13972 WP No. 7324 of 2026

1 -

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

WRIT PETITION NO. 7324 OF 2026 (LA-UDA)

BETWEEN:

DR. NAGASHREE K M W/O. VENKATESH.M.M, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT BELOW MENTIONED ADDRESS, R/O.773/6, 7^TH CROSS, RAMANUJA ROAD, K R MOHALLA, MYSORE -570 003.

… PETITIONER

(BY SMT. KUSUMA M., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSE AND URBAN, M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001.

MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JHANSI LAKSHMI BAI ROAD, MYSORE - 570 005. BY ITS COMMISSIONER,

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:13972 WP No. 7324 of 2026

HC-KAR

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JHANSI LAKSHMI BAI ROAD, MYSORE - 570 005.

… RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. A.S. HARISH, AGA FOR R1; SRI T.P. VIVEKANANDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASHING PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION DATED 03.04.2006, BEARING NO. LAQ(5)CR 540/2005-06 ISSUED BY THE 2^ND RESPONDENT AUTHORITY AT ANNEXURE - A TO THE WRIT PETITION IN SO FAR AS SCHEDULE PROPERTY BELONGING TO THE PETITIONERS IS CONCERNED (OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE) DIRECTION, DECLARING THAT THE LAND ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY ISSUANCE OF PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION DATED 03.04.2006, BEARING NO. LAQ(5)CR 540/2005-06 BY THE 2^ND RESPONDENT AUTHORITY AT ANNEXURE - A TO THE WRIT PETITION HAS LAPSED BY VIRTUE OF COMING IN TO FORCE OF THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013 IN SO FAR AS SCHEDULE LAND BELONGING TO THE PETITIONERS IS CONCERNED 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:13972 WP No. 7324 of 2026

HC-KAR

ORAL ORDER

Petitioner has assailed the validity of the acquisition proceedings initiated vide Preliminary Notification at Annexure-A dated 03.04.2006 insofar as the property of the petitioner.

It is submitted that the Preliminary Notification was issued on 03.04.2006 proposing to acquire the lands in Kurubarahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk, for formation of a residential layout and after such notification, there has been no further progress. Reliance is placed on the order passed in W.P.No.28873/2025 disposed of on 07.11.2025 in the case of Yasmin Achaiah v. state of Karnataka and others . It is submitted that insofar as the same Preliminary Notification, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has declared the acquisition proceedings as having been abandoned and lapsed and has set aside the notification. Accordingly, it is submitted that an order be passed on parity on the same grounds.

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:13972 WP No. 7324 of 2026

HC-KAR

Sri. T. P. Vivekananda, learned counsel

appearing for respondents 2 and 3 - MUDA submits that the order passed in W.P.No.28873/2025 to which MUDA is respondent is a matter of record.

Taking note that the Preliminary Notification is passed on 03.04.2026 and no further steps have been taken by the respondent - MUDA and also taking note of the order passed in W.P.No.28873/2025, the petition could be disposed of on same terms.

The observations made in W.P.No.28873/2025

from para 3 onwards are as follows:

"3. Learned counsel for both sides fairly submit that the issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of SHRI. C.BHASKARAN Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS - WP.No.7505/2014 (LA-UDA), D.D. 17.11.2020, wherein the Co-ordinate Bench has allowed the petition and quashed the Preliminary Notification dated 03.04.2006 issued by respondent No.2 insofar as the petitioner therein

5 -

NC: 2026:KHC:13972 WP No. 7324 of 2026

HC-KAR

was concerned. The operative portion of C.BHASKARAN's case (supra) reads as under:

(i) Petition is hereby allowed.

(ii) The impugned preliminary notification at Annexure-D dated 03.04.2006 and acquisition proceedings pursuant thereto are declared to have been abandoned and lapsed and the same are hereby quashed insofar as the schedule property of the petitioner is concerned.

(iii) The impugned Endorsement vide Annexure-Q dated 28.09.2013 issued by respondent No.2 is also hereby quashed."

4. It is not in dispute that no further proceedings have been initiated pursuant to the Preliminary Notification dated 03.04.2006. In view of the fact that the issue involved in this petition is squarely covered by the aforesaid decision, no further adjudication is required in the present case. Accordingly, this Court pass the following:

ORDER

i) The Writ Petition is allowed.

ii) The impugned Preliminary Notification dated 03.04.2006 at Annexure-A and all further proceedings pursuant thereto and declaration are

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:13972 WP No. 7324 of 2026

HC-KAR

hereby quashed, insofar as the petitioner's schedule property is concerned."

Taking note that after the Preliminary

Notification dated 03.04.2026, no steps have been taken to effectuate acquisition proceedings, the Preliminary Notification at Annexure-A dated 03.04.2006 and acquisition proceedings pursuant thereto are declared to have been abandoned and lapsed and is quashed insofar as the property of the petitioner is concerned.

7. Accordingly, petition is disposed of .

SD/(S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

VP