Karnataka High Court
Sri Nanjundaiah vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 August, 2025
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:30255
WP No. 22385 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION NO.22385 OF 2025 (LA-KIADB)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. NANJUNDAIAH,
S/O CHANDRAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
RESIDING AT CHEELURU VILLAGE,
MARLAVADI HOBLI,
HAROHALLI TALUK,
RAMANAGARA-562 112.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SRIHARI A.V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES,
Digitally signed by
NAGAVENI VIKASA SOUDHA,
Location: High Court of
Karnataka BENGALURU-560 001,
BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA
DEVELOPMENT BOARD,
EAST WING, KHANIJA BHAVAN,
BENGALURU-560 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER.
3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-1,
THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA
DEVELOPMENT BOARD,
NO.14/1, ARAVINDA BHAVAN,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:30255
WP No. 22385 of 2025
HC-KAR
1ST FLOOR, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. VASANTH, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE GENERAL AWARD BEARING NO.KIADB.LAQ.2013-
14 DATED 30.12.2013 AND BEARING
NO.KIADB.LAQ.722/2019-20 11.10.2019 VIDE ANNEXURES-A
AND A1, PASSED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT AND TO
DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF THE
PETITIONER AS PER SECTION 29(2) OF THE KIAD ACT FOR
PASSING THE CONSENT AWARD IN RESPECT OF
PETITIONERS LANDS MEASURING 37 GUNTAS IN
SY.NO.110/1 AND 30 GUNTAS IN SY.NO.110/12, CHEELURU
VILLAGE, MARALAWADI HOBLI, HAROHALLI TALUK,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER
The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
counsel for the respondents in unison would submit that the
issue in the lis stand answered by the judgment rendered by
this Court, which is in fact following the earlier order passed
by the Co-ordinate Benches.
2. The petitioner is before this Court, seeking for the
following prayers:
NC: 2025:KHC:30255
HC-KAR
"i) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing
the General Award bearing No.KIADB:LAQ::
2013-14 dated 30.12.2013 and bearing
No.KIADB:LAQ: 722/2019-20 11.10.2019 vide
Annexures-A and A1 passed by the Third
Respondent.
ii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus
directing the Respondents to consider the case
of the Petitioner as per Section 29(2) of the
KIAD Act for passing the consent Award in
respect of Petitioner's Lands measuring 37
guntas in Sy.No.110/1 and 30 guntas in
Sy.No.110/12, Cheeluru Village, Maralawadi
Hobli, Harohalli Taluk, Ramanagara District.
iii) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court
deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the
case and in the interest of Justice and Equity."
3. Heard Sri Srihari A.V., learned counsel appearing
for the petitioner; Sri Spoorthy Hegde N., learned High Court
Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri
Vasanth, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and
3.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that in plethora of identical matters, co-ordinate
NC: 2025:KHC:30255
HC-KAR
benches of this Court has considered the issue and answered
in favour of the petitioner. One such order passed by the co-
ordinate bench of this Court in W.P.No.15026/2021 disposed
on 18.08.2021, has allowed the petition and directed the
respondents to consider the case of the petitioner therein and
pass necessary orders in accordance with law.
5. The learned High Court Government Pleader would
not dispute the position of law; the identical circumstance and
afore-quoted judgment rendered by the co-ordinate bench of
this Court.
6. The co-ordinate bench of this Court in
W.P.No.15026/2021 disposed on 18.08.2021, has held as
follows:
"Learned Additional Government Advocate waives
notice for respondent No.1. Learned counsel
Smt. Gowharunnissa, who is present before this Court,
accepts notice for respondents No.2 and 3.
2. The petitioners' property bearing Sy.No.5/4,
measuring 27 guntas, situated at Mindahallil Village,
Kasaba Hobli, Malur Taluk, Kolar District, was notified
for acquisition by State Government for the benefit of
respondent No.2-KIADB. The grievance of the
petitioner is that, while the General Award passed by
NC: 2025:KHC:30255
HC-KAR
the respondent No.3-Special Land Acquisition Officer-
NIMZ was questioned by some of the landlords, this
Court in the Smt. Rathnamma Vs. The State of
Karnataka in W.P.No.31702/2018, by order dated
29.11.2018 has set aside the General Award and
directed the respondents to consider the claim of the
petitioner under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act, 1966,
within a period of two months. Therefore, it is the
prayer of the petitioner that similar orders may be
passed in this writ petition to set aside the General
Award and direct the respondent authorities to consider
claim for compensation under Section 29(2) of the Act.
3. The submission of the learned counsel for
petitioner is not controverted at the hands of the
respondents.
4. Consequently, this Court proceeds to pass the
following:-
ORDER
(i) Writ Petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) The impugned General Award at
Annexure-A, dated 17.07.2021 is hereby
quashed.
(iii) Respondent No.3 (SLAO) is hereby
directed to consider the claim of the
petitioners under Section 29(2) of the
KIAD Act, 1966 within a period of four
months from the date of receipt of copy of
this order.
NC: 2025:KHC:30255
HC-KAR
(iv) It is made clear that in the event, if any
dispute arises with regard to entitlement
and apportionment of the award amount,
the General Award at Annexure-A, which
has been quashed by this Court would
revive.
(v) Liberty is reserved to Special Land
Acquisition Officer, KIADB to withdraw the
amount, if deposited before the Civil Court
pursuant to General award."
Therefore, the issues as answered by the co-ordinate
bench of this Court supra and in the light of the issues
standing covered on all its fours, the writ petition stands
disposed on the very same findings and the directions.
Ordered accordingly.
SD/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE
MD
