Munianjinappa vs The State Of Karnataka
2023 Latest Caselaw 5565 Kant

                                             -1-
                                                         NC: 2023:KHC:28691
                                                       WP No. 4555 of 2022




                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                          DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

                                           BEFORE
                             THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS
                         WRIT PETITION NO. 4555 OF 2022 (LA-KIADB)
                  BETWEEN:

                  SRI. MUNIANJINAPPA,
                  AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS,
                  S/O LATE MUNIHANUMANTHAPPA,
                  R/AT NO.343, GOVERNMENT SCHOOL ROAD,
                  JAKKUR, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK,
                  BENGALURU - 560 064.
                                                              ...PETITIONER
                  (BY SRI. ABHINAV R, ADVOCATE)

                  AND:

                  1.    THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
                        DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES,
                        VIDHANA SOUDHA,
Digitally signed by     DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD,
JUANITA THEJESWINI
Location: HIGH          BENGALURU - 560 001,
COURT OF                REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
KARNATAKA


                  2.    THE KARNTAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS
                        DEVELOPMENT BOARD,
                        KHANIJA BHAVAN,
                        RACE COURSE ROAD,
                        BENGALURU - 560 001,
                        REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

                  3.    THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION
                        OFFICER K.I.A.D.B,
                             -2-
                                        NC: 2023:KHC:28691
                                       WP No. 4555 of 2022




    KHANIJA BHAVAN,
    RACE COURSE ROAD,
    BENGALURU - 560 001.
                                              ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RANSA VASANTHI D.L, HCGP FOR R1;
    SRI. H.L PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)

     THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ENDORSEMENT BEARING NO. B/KIADB/SLAO2/740/2021-2022
DATED 22.06.2021 AT ANNX-L ISSUED BY THE R-3 BY
ALLOWING THE PRESENT WRIT PETITION AND ETC.,

     THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                         ORDER

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

On the previous occasion, learned counsel for the

respondent-Karnataka Industrial Areas Development

Board (for short 'KIADB') had pointed out that the

impugned endorsement was issued declining to entertain

representations given by the petitioner for enhancement of

compensation on the ground that the compensation that

was given to the petitioner was on the basis of the consent

award and in terms of the agreement entered into by the

NC: 2023:KHC:28691 WP No. 4555 of 2022

petitioner with the respondent-KIADB. However, this

matter was adjourned at the request of learned counsel for

the petitioner, who had submitted that he would take

instructions and make submissions.

2. Today, the learned counsel for the respondent-

KIADB has furnished copies of several judgments of this

Court, including the case of Sri.Mallikarjun Vs. The Special

Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) and another in

W.P.No.11095/2021 dated 11.08.2021 followed by

W.P.No.9388/2021 dated 08.09.2021. The learned counsel

has also furnished a copy of an order of the Division Bench

in the case of Sri.Syed Khader and Others Vs. The

Thasildar Land Acquisition and Valuation Committee and

Others, in W.A.No.448/2021 dated 16.08.2022, wherein

the Division Bench upheld such a contention that since

compensation has been awarded to the appellant therein

on the basis of a consent award, there is no good ground

for interference. The said order was taken up before the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C)

NC: 2023:KHC:28691 WP No. 4555 of 2022

No.18335/2022. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, by order

dated 11.11.2022 upheld the order of the Division Bench

by holding that the decision of the High Court declining to

entertain such a challenge cannot be faulted.

3. In the present case too, the compensation

awarded to the petitioner is in terms of an agreement

dated 04.04.2017 entered by the petitioner with the

respondent-SLAO. In that view of the matter, the issue

stands squarely covered by the decision cited by the

learned counsel for the respondent-KIADB.

4. However, learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that the grievance of the petitioner is that though

the land in question is a converted land, by inadvertence,

the agreement has been entered on the premise that it is

an agricultural land. It is therefore prayed that a direction

may be issued to the Special Land Acquisition Officer of

the KIADB to reconsider the grievance of the petitioner.

NC: 2023:KHC:28691 WP No. 4555 of 2022

5. Accepting the submission of the learned counsel

for the petitioner, this writ petition stands disposed of with

a direction to the Special Land Acquisition Officer of the

respondent-KIADB to verify the claim of the petitioner. If it

is found true that a mistake has occurred, then the KIADB

is permitted to re-enter into an agreement showing the

correct facts and award compensation accordingly.

Consequently, the writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

rv CT: BHK