Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

R Nagendra Kumar, Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Home
Karnataka HC
2026
R Nagendra Kumar, Vs State of KarnatakaR Nagendra Kumar, v. State of Karnataka

Allowed¶41

R Nagendra Kumar, v. State of Karnataka

Land acquisition – Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act, 1987 – S.17(1) and S.19(1) and (2)

Karnataka HC23 Jun 2026WP/9658/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Petition No.9658 of 2026 (LA-UDA), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, decided 23.06.2026 by R. Nataraj, J. Petitioners R Nagendra Kumar and others sought certiorari under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution to quash Preliminary Notification No.Pra.Bhu.Swa.10/1992-93 dated 10.07.1992 (S.17(1)) and Final Notification No.Va.Na.E.639 MIB 93 dated 19.03.1996 (Ss.19(1) and (2)) under the Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act, 1987, issued for Bogadi III Stage Extension in respect of Sy.No.121/1B, Bogadi Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore. Grounds: no award passed, possession not taken, acquisition abandoned/scheme lapsed; parity with W.P.Nos.54439-54443/2015 where a Co-ordinate Bench quashed identical notifications for Sy.No.48/2. Held: petitioners entitled to like treatment; writ petition allowed; notifications quashed qua Sy.No.121/1B. Keywords: lapse of acquisition, no award, KUDA Act 1987, MUDA, Bogadi III Stage, quashing of preliminary and final notifications.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; the Preliminary Notification dated 10.07.1992 and the Final Notification dated 19.03.1996 quashed insofar as the land bearing Sy.No.121/1B of Bogadi Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk and District. ¶41

Why is it important?

Since a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.Nos.54439-54443/2015 had quashed the identical notifications for Sy.No.48/2 of Bogadi Village as the scheme had lapsed, the petitioners are entitled to be treated alike. ¶40

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition allowed; the Preliminary Notification dated 10.07.1992 and the Final Notification dated 19.03.1996 quashed insofar as the land bearing Sy.No.121/1B of Bogadi Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk and District.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Preliminary Notification dated 10.07.1992 and the Final Notification dated 19.03.1996 acquiring Sy.No.121/1B of Bogadi Village for Bogadi III Stage Extension ought to be quashed on the ground that no award was passed and possession was not taken, rendering the acquisition abandoned/lapsed. +1 more

Court's answer

The Preliminary Notification No.Pra.Bhu.Swa.10/1992-93 dated 10.07.1992 issued by respondent No.2 and the Final Notification No.Va.Na.E.639 MIB 93 dated 19.03.1996 issued by respondent No.1 are quashed insofar as the land bearing Sy.No.121/1B of Bogadi Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk and District.

Ratio / Principle

Since a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.Nos.54439-54443/2015 had quashed the identical notifications for Sy.No.48/2 of Bogadi Village as the scheme had lapsed, the petitioners are entitled to be treated alike.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Land acquisition - Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act, 1987 - S.17(1) and S.19(1) and (2) - Preliminary Notification No.Pra.Bhu.Swa.10/1992-93 dated 10.07.1992 and Final Notification No.Va.Na.E.639 MIB 93 dated 19.03.1996 for formation of Bogadi III Stage Extension, Mysore, qua Sy.No.121/1B of Bogadi Village, Kasaba Hobli - No award passed and possession not taken; acquisition contended abandoned and scheme lapsed - Issue squarely covered by Co-ordinate Bench decision in W.P.Nos.54439-54443/2015 quashing identical notifications for Sy.No.48/2 of Bogadi Village - Counsel for respondents Nos.2 and 3 did not dispute coverage - Petitioners entitled to be treated alike - Writ petition allowed; notifications quashed insofar as petitioners' land.

A

NC: 2026:KHC:31120 WP No. 9658 of 2026

1 -

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF JUNE, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 9658 OF 2026 (LA-UDA)

BETWEEN:

R NAGENDRA KUMAR S/O. LATE INDRAMMA.K.S AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS

R.RAJENDRA KUMAR S/O. LATE INDRAMMA.K.S AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS

R VISHWAMANGALA URF NAGARATHNAM S/O. LATE INDRAMMA.K.S AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS

R.JAGAN MOHAN, S/O. LATE INDRAMMA.K.S AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS

Digitally signed by HEMALATHA J Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

ALL ARE R/AT BOGADI BOGADI POST, MYSORE TALUK MYSORE-570006.

(BY SMT. KUSUMA M., ADVOCATE)

…PETITIONERS

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOUSE AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001.

MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY JHANSI LAKSHMI BAI ROAD MYSORE-570005

BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:31120 WP No. 9658 of 2026

HC-KAR

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY JHANSI LAKSHMI BAI ROAD MYSORE-570005.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.ADITYA DIWAKAR, AGA FOR R1; SRI. G B SHARATH GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER SIMILAR WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION, QUASHING THE PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION DATED 10.07.1992 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEARING NO. PRA BHU SWA.10/1992-93 PUBLISHED IN THE KARNATAKA OFFICIAL GAZETTE AT ANNEXURE B TO THE WRIT PETITION IN SO FAR AS SCHEDULE PROPERTY 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 R. NATARAJ

ORAL ORDER

The petitioners have challenged a Preliminary Notification bearing No.Pra.Bhu.Swa.10/1992-93 dated 10.07.1992 issued by respondent No.2 under Section 17(1) of the Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’ for short) as well as a Final Notification bearing No.Va.Na.E.639 MIB 93 dated 19.03.1996 issued by respondent

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:31120 WP No. 9658 of 2026

HC-KAR

No.1 under Section 19(1) and (2) of the Act in so far as the land in Sy.No.121/1B of Bogadi Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk and District.

The petitioners contend that the aforementioned land was notified for acquisition by respondent No.1 for formation of Bogadi III Stage Extension. A Final Notification was issued declaring the intent of the State Government to acquire the aforesaid land for the purpose of Bogadi III Stage Extension. However, no award is passed and possession of the property is not taken and hence, the acquisition is abandoned. It is also contended that the issue is squarely covered by the judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.Nos.54439-54443/2015.

The learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 does not dispute that the acquisition of Sy.No.48/2 of Bogadi Village for formation of Bogadi III Stage Layout in terms of the Preliminary Notification dated 10.07.1992 and Final Notification dated 19.03.1996 came up for consideration before this Court in W.P.Nos.54439-54443/2015 and that a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had quashed the notifications as the scheme had lapsed.

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:31120 WP No. 9658 of 2026

HC-KAR

In that view of the matter, the petitioners are also entitled to be treated alike. Consequently, the writ petition is

allowed .

The impugned Preliminary Notification bearing No.Pra.Bhu.Swa.10/1992-93 dated 10.07.1992 issued by respondent No.2 and a Final Notification bearing No.Va.Na.E.639 MIB 93 dated 19.03.1996 issued by respondent No.1 in so far as the land bearing Sy.No.121/1B of Bogadi Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk and District, are quashed.

Sd/(R. NATARAJ) JUDGE

HA

LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 26

Issues for consideration

2 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the Preliminary Notification dated 10.07.1992 and the Final Notification dated 19.03.1996 acquiring Sy.No.121/1B of Bogadi Village for Bogadi III Stage Extension ought to be quashed on the ground that no award was passed and possession was not taken, rendering the acquisition abandoned/lapsed.medium confidence¶35
The court held
The Preliminary Notification No.Pra.Bhu.Swa.10/1992-93 dated 10.07.1992 issued by respondent No.2 and the Final Notification No.Va.Na.E.639 MIB 93 dated 19.03.1996 issued by respondent No.1 are quashed insofar as the land bearing Sy.No.121/1B of Bogadi Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk and District.ratio¶42
2.
Whether the petitioners are entitled to parity with the Co-ordinate Bench decision in W.P.Nos.54439-54443/2015, wherein identical notifications were quashed as the scheme had lapsed.medium confidence¶35
The court held
Since a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.Nos.54439-54443/2015 had quashed the identical notifications for Sy.No.48/2 of Bogadi Village as the scheme had lapsed, the petitioners are entitled to be treated alike.ratio¶40

Cases cited

Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority

AI extract

W.P.Nos.54439-54443/2015Applied¶36

Statutes considered

3 provisions across 2 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticles 226 and 227¶27
Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act, 1987Section 17(1)¶30 Sections 19(1) and (2)¶34

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Preliminary Notification No.Pra.Bhu.Swa.10/1992-93 dated 10.07.1992 issued by respondent No.2 (Mysore Urban Development Authority) under Section 17(1) of the Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act, 1987, and Final Notification No.Va.Na.E.639 MIB 93 dated 19.03.1996 issued by respondent No.1 (State of Karnataka) under Section 19(1) and (2) of the Act, insofar as the land in Sy.No.121/1B of Bogadi Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk and District.¶30
Mysore Urban Development Authority (respondent No.2) and State of Karnataka (respondent No.1) · 10.07.1992 (Preliminary Notification); 19.03.1996 (Final Notification)
Prior proceeding
In W.P.Nos.54439-54443/2015, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court quashed the identical Preliminary Notification dated 10.07.1992 and Final Notification dated 19.03.1996 relating to Sy.No.48/2 of Bogadi Village for formation of Bogadi III Stage Layout, as the scheme had lapsed.¶36
Prior proceeding
Acquisition of the schedule land for Bogadi III Stage Extension: no award was passed and possession of the property was not taken; the petitioners contend the acquisition stands abandoned.¶35

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
R Nagendra Kumar S/o. Late Indramma.K.S¶8
Smt. Kusuma M.
petitioner
R.Rajendra Kumar S/o. Late Indramma.K.S¶9
Smt. Kusuma M.
petitioner
R Vishwamangala Urf Nagarathnam S/o. Late Indramma.K.S¶10
Smt. Kusuma M.
petitioner
R.Jagan Mohan S/o. Late Indramma.K.S¶11
Smt. Kusuma M.
respondent
State of Karnataka, rep. by its Secretary, Department of House and Urban Development Authority¶17
Sri. Aditya Diwakar
respondent
Mysore Urban Development Authority, by its Commissioner¶19
Sri. G B Sharath Gowda
respondent
Special Land Acquisition Officer, Mysore Urban Development Authority¶24
Sri. G B Sharath Gowda

Coram

AI extract

Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. Natarajauthor¶28

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Karnataka HC
Decided on: 23 Jun 2026 · June
Registered: 25 Mar 2026
Case no.: WP/9658/2026
CNR: KAHC010225092026
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: R. Natara
Disposal: ALLOWED
Case type: Writ Petition (LA-UDA)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from R. Natara

Kumari Kiran Vinod Vs the State of Karnataka
22 Jun 2026
B a Gunda Bhatta Vs State of Karnataka
22 Jun 2026
Sri H M Mahesh Vs Bangalore Development Authority
22 Jun 2026
Sri. Jayram Vs the Bangalore Development Authority
23 Jun 2026
Sri Manjunath Vs the State of Karnataka
23 Jun 2026
Sri M Ramu Vs State of Karnataka
23 Jun 2026

Cite this judgement

R Nagendra Kumar, v. State of Karnataka, WP/9658/2026 (KA), decided on 23 June 2026.

The High Court of Karnataka publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Cases cited1

W.P.Nos.54439-54443/2015Applied¶36

Open Authorities

Statutes3

Constitution of IndiaArticles 226 and 227
Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act, 1987Section 17(1) · Sections 19(1) and (2)

View all statutes

Procedural history3

Preliminary Notification No.Pra.Bhu.Swa.10/1992-93 dated 10.07.1992 issued by respondent No.2 (Mysore Urban Development Authority) under Section 17(1) of the Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act, 1987, and Final Notification No.Va.Na.E.639 MIB 93 dated 19.03.1996 issued by respondent No.1 (State of Karnataka) under Section 19(1) and (2) of the Act, insofar as the land in Sy.No.121/1B of Bogadi Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk and District.Mysore Urban Development Authority (respondent No.2) and State of Karnataka (respondent No.1) · 10.07.1992 (Preliminary Notification); 19.03.1996 (Final Notification)
In W.P.Nos.54439-54443/2015, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court quashed the identical Preliminary Notification dated 10.07.1992 and Final Notification dated 19.03.1996 relating to Sy.No.48/2 of Bogadi Village for formation of Bogadi III Stage Layout, as the scheme had lapsed.
Acquisition of the schedule land for Bogadi III Stage Extension: no award was passed and possession of the property was not taken; the petitioners contend the acquisition stands abandoned.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. Nataraj

Parties & counsel