Writ Petition No. 17688 of 2024 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:7390 WP No. 17688 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 17688 OF 2024 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN: 1. SRI N P MANJUNATH S/O LATE PILLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS 2. SMT. NARAYANAMMA W/O LATE PILLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS SENIOR BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED 3. SMT. MANJULA B C D/O LATE PILLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
Legal Reasoning
Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka ALL ARE RESIDING AT NAGANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE, CHANNARAYAPATNA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562 135
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR K, ADVOCATE) AND: …PETITIONERS 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 2. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7390 WP No. 17688 of 2024 5TH FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU-560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER. 3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER -2 KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, OFFICE AT NO.39, SHANTIGRUHA BHARATH SCOUTS AND GUIDES BUILDING 4TH FLOOR, PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU-560001 4. SRI. N P VASANTHA KUMAR S/O LATE PILLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT NO.70, HSR LAYOUT, BTS DEPOT ROAD, 24TH MAIN, BENGALURU-560 102. (BY SRI.SPOORTHY HEGDE.N, HCGP FOR R1; SRI.P.V.CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3; SRI.MADHUSUDAN.M, ADVOCATE FOR R4) …RESPONDENTS THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH GENERAL AWARD DTD. 13.07.2022, BEARING NO. KIADB/LA- 2/1475/2022-23, PASSED BY THE R-3 (ANNX-A) IN SO FAR IT RELATES THE LAND IN SY.NO. 52/10, BLOCK NO.10, AT MEASURING NAGANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE, CHANNARAYAPATNA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER CONCERNED AND ETC., 29 GUNTAS, SITUATED ACRE 1 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7390 WP No. 17688 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER Petitioners claiming to be the erstwhile co-owners of land bearing Sy.No.52/10, Block No.10, measuring 01 acre 29 guntas situated at Naganayakanahalli Village, Channarayapatna Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, which was acquired by respondent-KIADB are before this Court seeking following reliefs. a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, to quash general award dated 13.07.2022, bearing No. KIADB/LA-2/1475/2022-23, passed by the 3rd Respondent(Annexure-A) in so far it relates the land in Sy. No.52/10, Block No.10, measuring 1 acre 29 guntas, situated at Naganayakanahalli Village, Channarayapatna Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, insofar as petitioners concerned. b) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction, directing the respondents No.2 and 3 to consider the case of the petitioners as per section 29(2) of the KIADB Act for passing the consent award and issue a direction to the Respondents No.2 and 3 to re- determine the compensation under section 29(2) of the KIAD Act, 1962, within a reasonable period. c) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction, directing the respondents No.2 and 3 to release 1/5th of the compensation amount, within a reasonable period. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:7390 WP No. 17688 of 2024 d) Pass any other appropriate order which this Hon'ble court deems facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice. the fit in 2. A suit in O.S.No.387/2014 has been filed by respondent No.4 herein for relief of partition in which the aforesaid property is one of the property's in respect of which the partition is sought for. It appears that on an application filed by the petitioners who are the defendants in the said suit in I.A.Nos.12, 12(a) and 20 seeking permission to withdrawn the compensation amount i.e., awarded by the respondent-KIADB in respect of acquisition property, the trial Court has permitted the parties to withdraw 1/5th share each in the said compensation. Based on the same, the petitioners are before this Court contending the general award which has passed in without their consent, and the same be quashed and respondent- KIADB be directed to pass consent award in terms of the Section 29(2) of the KIADB Act, which is more beneficial to the petitioners. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:7390 WP No. 17688 of 2024 3. Respondent No.4 who is the plaintiff before the trial Court is represented through learned counsel Shri Madhusudan M, through video conferencing, who has no objections for the same. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent-KIADB on the other hand submits that the general award came to be passed in view of the pendency of the suit and the amount was therefore deposited before the reference Court in LAC No.24/2022. He further submits that though the trial Court has permitted the petitioners, who are the defendants and the respondent No.4/plaintiff along with legal heirs of the defendant No.3-Yashodamma to withdraw 1/5th share each in the compensation, only defendant Nos.1, 2 and 4 and plaintiff are before this Court. Therefore he submits liberty be reserved to the respondent-KIADB to deposit the said 1/5th share of defendant No.3 in suit in O.S.No.387/2014 which is pending consideration before the trial Court. 5. Submission are taken record. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:7390 WP No. 17688 of 2024 6. Accordingly, following:
Decision
ORDER (i) Writ petition is allowed. (ii) Impugned General Award dated 13.07.2022 produced at Annexure-A passed by the respondent No.3-KIADB insofar as the property of the petitioners herein is concerned, is hereby quashed. (iii) Petitioners and Respondent No.4 shall appear before the respondent-SLAO, and respondent-SLAO shall consider and passed the award in terms of the Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966. It is made clear if there any dispute, the general award would stand revived. (iv) Respondent-SLAO is at liberty to withdraw the amount in deposited before reference Court in LAC No.24/2022, if any, and either offer the parties to disburse or deposit before the Court in O.S.No.387/2014. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:7390 WP No. 17688 of 2024 (v) Since the petitioners who are the defendants and respondent No.4 is plaintiff in O.S.No.387/2014 are represented through their learned counsel shall appear before the SLAO without any further notice on the date fixed. Since the legal heirs of the Yashodamma who is defendant No.3 are not before this Court, SLAO shall ensure service of notice on them, before passing the award. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE ASN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4