Sri Munikrishnappa Vs the State of Karnataka

SRI MUNIKRISHNAPPA S/O. LATE MARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESIDENT OF MOPARAHALLI VILLAGE, ADINARAYANA HOSAHALLI, KONAGHATTA POST, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 561203

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

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

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:16271 WP No. 8585 of 2026

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

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

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE GENERAL AWARD DATED 23.11.2018 BEARING NO. BENGALURU/VIBHUSWAAA-2/2298/2018-19 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 IN RESPECT OF LAND IN SY. NO. 60, MEASURING 18 GUNTAS, SITUATED AT ADINARAYANA HOSAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED, WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D AND ETC.

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, 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. Learned Sri. H.L.Pradeep Kumar accepts notice for respondent Nos.2 and 3. The matter is taken up for disposal by consent.

¶28

The petitioner has assailed the validity of the

¶29

general award dated 23.11.2018 passed by Respondent No.3 vide Annexure-D in respect of land in Sy.No.60,

¶30

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:16271 WP No. 8585 of 2026

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

measuring 18 guntas situated at Adinarayana Hosahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Doddaballapura Taluk, Bangalore Rural District insofar as the petitioner’s lands are concerned.

¶33

The petitioner also sought for issuance of a suitable direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 04.08.2025 for the grant of developed land in the industrial layout formed by acquiring the land of the petitioner.

¶34

The petitioner submits that the general award may be set aside and a consent award passed taking note of Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (for short KIAD Act). It is further submitted that in terms of Government Order dated 23.02.2021, there is a scheme under which the developed land could be granted in view of cash compensation, and the same may be considered.

¶35

4 -

¶36

NC: 2026:KHC:16271 WP No. 8585 of 2026

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

5. Learned counsel appearing for respondent-

¶39

KIADB does not dispute the existence of the Government Order dated 23.02.2021, which governs the allotment of developed land, in lieu of monetary compensation. However, he submits that the petitioner has not yet submitted any representation before the competent authority, seeking such allotment. It is further submitted that if the petitioner submits an appropriate representation, the same will be duly considered in accordance with law.

¶40

Submission is recorded.

¶41

Accordingly, this Court passes the following:

¶42

ORDER

¶43

(i) The writ petition is allowed.

¶44

(ii) The impugned General Award dated 23.11.2018 passed by respondent No.3 is hereby quashed.

¶45

(iii) The petitioner is granted liberty to submit a fresh representation to KIADB, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a certified

¶46

5 -

¶47

NC: 2026:KHC:16271 WP No. 8585 of 2026

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

copy of this order. Upon receipt of such representation, the respondent-KIADB shall consider the same in terms of Government Order dated 23.02.2021 as per Annexure-F and pass appropriate orders.

¶50

(iv) The said consideration by the KIADB shall be within eight weeks from the date of submission of the representation by the petitioner.

¶51

(v) The respondent-KIADB is at liberty to withdraw the amount, if any, deposited before the Competent Court.

¶52

SD/(S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

¶53

KTY List No.: 3 Sl No.: 14

Sri Munikrishnappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Munikrishnappa 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

M/S Emmanuvel Scrap Works Private Limited Vs Commercial Tax Officer (ENFORCEMENT)-2

Yeldur Narayanswamy Nagabushana Vs the Union of India

Sri Pokala Malleshwara Reddy Vs the Commissioner of Central Tax

Smt. B. M. Radhamani Vs the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board

Umesh Kollira Muddappa (Huf) Vs National Faceless Assessment Centre

Shri Shivakumar N Vs the State of Karnataka