Smt. Sujathamma Vs the State of Karnataka

THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, EAST WING, KHANIZA BHAVAN, BANGALORE-560001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER.

¶16

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, HEAD OFFICE, KIADB, NO.14/1, ARAVINDA BHAVAN,

¶17

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:13670 WP No. 7402 of 2026

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

1^ST FLOOR, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560001

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. A. S. HARISH, AGA FOR R1; SRI. P. V. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND 3)

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITON IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE GENERAL AWARD BEARING NO.KIADB/LAQ/1928/2024-25 DATED 29.03.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-A IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER LAND CONCERNED MEASURING TO EXTENT OF 1 ACRE 15 GUNTAS IN SY. NO.47/2 OF MALLIYYAPPANAHALLI VILLAGE PASSED BY THE R3 ETC.,

¶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

¶27

notice for respondent No.1. Sri. P.V. Chandrashekar, learned counsel accepts notice for respondents 2 and 3.

¶28

The matter is taken up for disposal by consent.

¶29

Petitioner has sought for setting aside of the

¶30

general award and further sought for a direction that instead of compensation by way of cash, in terms of the

¶31

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:13670 WP No. 7402 of 2026

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

Government Order dated 23.02.2021 the developed land may be directed to be offered to the petitioner.

¶34

It is noticed that the petitioner is the absolute owner of an extent of 1 acre 15 guntas in Sy.No.47/2 of Malliyyappanahalli Village, Vemagal Hobli, Kolar Taluk, Kolar District.

¶35

It is submitted that the property of the petitioner was notified under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (for short 'KIAD Act'). Petitioner submits that he is willing for a consent award being passed and that compensation may

¶36

be granted by way of developed land in lieu of cash compensation in terms of the Government Order dated 23.02.2021.

¶37

Reliance is placed on the order passed in W.P.No.21363/2025. The relevant paragraphs of the said order reads as follows:

¶38

4 -

¶39

NC: 2026:KHC:13670 WP No. 7402 of 2026

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

"3. The issue raised in this petition regarding prayer (c) to quash the impugned General Award is squarely covered by the several decisions of this Court and one such order is passed in RUKMINAMMA VS STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS - W.P.NO. 3092/2025 D.D. 05.02.2025. Undisputedly, the petitioner’s land to the extent of 10½ guntas has been acquired under the notification, and the acquisition proceedings have attained finality.

¶42

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is willing to accept the developed land by way of a consent award, in terms of the Government Order dated 23.02.2021.

¶43

5. Learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 – KIADB submits that if the petitioner is willing to accept the compensation in accordance with the said Government Order dated 23.02.2021, the same will be considered by the authority in accordance with law.

¶44

6. The submission is placed on record.

¶45

7. Accordingly, this Court pass the following :

¶46

ORDER

¶47

(i) The Writ Petition is allowed in part.

¶48

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:13670 WP No. 7402 of 2026

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

(ii) The impugned General Award dated 29.03.2025 passed by the third respondent at Annexure-B in so far as the petition schedule property is concerned, is hereby quashed .

¶51

(iii) The third respondent is directed to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 15.03.2025 in terms of the Government Order dated 23.02.2021 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶52

(iv) It is needles to state that in the event of any dispute, the General Award stand restored.

¶53

(v) Respondent No.3 is at liberty to withdraw the amount deposited before this Court in respect of the schedule land in question."

¶54

In light of the observations made in W.P.No.21363/2025, the following order is passed:

¶55

ORDER

¶56

(i) The petition is allowed-in-part .

¶57

(ii) The impugned general award dated 29.03.2025 at Annexure-A insofar as the petition schedule property is concerned is quashed.

¶58

6 -

¶59

NC: 2026:KHC:13670 WP No. 7402 of 2026

¶60

HC-KAR

¶61

(iii) Respondent No.3 is directed to consider the case of the petitioner in terms of the observations made above and in terms of the Government Order dated 23.02.2021 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within 3 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶62

(iv) Needless to state, in the event if there is any dispute, the general award at Annexure-A would stand restored.

¶63

(v) Respondent No.3 is at liberty to withdraw the award amount, if deposited before the Civil Court in respect of the schedule land in question.

¶64

Sd/(S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

¶65

MCR

Smt. Sujathamma v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Sujathamma 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

Cases cited

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