Sri Nagaraju Vs the State of Karnataka

SMT. MUNIVENKATAMMA W/O. ANJINAPPA, AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT KONAGHATTA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-561203.

¶11

…PETITIONERS

¶12

(BY SRI. SHARAN N.MAJAGE., ADVOCATE)

¶13

Digitally signed by VIDYA G R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

AND:

¶15

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

¶16

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER, KHANIJA BHAVANA, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU-560001.

¶17

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:13672 WP No. 7366 of 2026

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

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

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. A. S. HARISH, AGA FOR R1, SRI. H. L. PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONER DATED 11.12.2025 AS PER ANNEXURE-E AND F.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondent No.1. Learned counsel Sri. H.L. Pradeep Kumar accepts notice for respondents No.2 and 3.

¶27

Petitioners have sought for issuance of writ of mandamus to direct respondent No.3 to consider the representations at Annexures-E and F.

¶28

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:13672 WP No. 7366 of 2026

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

The case made out by the petitioners is that the

¶31

final notification under Section 28(4) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 has been passed on 27.02.2023 and proceedings have progressed. However, petitioners have not been paid any compensation though they are entitled for the same. Petitioners submit that representations have been made at Annexures-E and F.

¶32

Perused the representations at Annexures-E and F. Petitioners have sought for disbursal of compensation in terms of the said representations.

¶33

Sri. H. L. Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the KIADB submits that the said representations at Annexures-E and F, would be considered and appropriate orders passed in accordance with law and as per the legal entitlement of petitioners within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

¶34

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:13672 WP No. 7366 of 2026

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

Recording the undertaking of the learned

¶37

counsel for the KIADB, petition is disposed of . All contentions on merits are kept open. Needless to state, petitioners to make out clarifications and furnish documents as may be required and the respondents are also at liberty to correspond with the revenue department in the event any clarifications are required.

¶38

Sd/(S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

¶39

MCR

Sri Nagaraju v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Nagaraju 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. Esar Mahdi Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S. Reliflex Exim Services (Opc) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

Smt Suma Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Devaraja Vs State of Karnataka

M/S Praathamika Krishipatthina Sahakara Sangha N Vs the Assessment Unit

Sri. Shreenivasa Vs the State of Karnataka