Karnataka High Court
Smt. Shantabai W/O Chandragouda Alias ... vs The Union Of India on 21 August, 2025
Author: S.Sunil Dutt Yadav
Bench: S.Sunil Dutt Yadav
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10586-DB
WA No. 100171 of 2025
C/W WA No. 100172 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL
WRIT APPEAL NO.100171 OF 2025 (LA-UDA)
C/W. WRIT APPEAL NO. 100172 OF 2025 (LA-RES)
IN WA NO.100171/2025
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SHANTABAI W/O. CHANDRAGOUDA @
CHANDRASHEKHAR DESAI,
AGE: 80 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O. MUMMIGATTI-580008,
TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
2. SMT. NEELAVVA W/O. YALLAPA CHIKKANNAVAR,
AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE,
R/O. MUMMIGATTI-580008,
TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN
KATTIMANI 3. BASAVARAJ S/O. CHANDRAGOUDA @
Location: High
Court of Karnataka, CHANDRASHEKHAR DESAI,
Dharwad Bench
AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MUMMIGATTI-580008,
TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
4. SOMANGOUDA S/O. CHANDRAGOUDA @
CHANDRASHEKAR DESAI,
AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MUMMIGATTI-580008,
TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
5. SIDDANAGOUDA S/O. CHANDRAGOUDA @
CHANDRASHEKAR DESAI,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10586-DB
WA No. 100171 of 2025
C/W WA No. 100172 of 2025
HC-KAR
AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MUMMIGATTI-580008,
TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
6. ISHWAR S/O. GANGAPPA DESAI,
AGE: 80 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MUMMIGATTI-580008,
TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SHRIHARSH A. NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
(DHARWAD BELAGAVI SECTION),
RAJATAGIRI, GANDHINAGAR,
DHARWAD-580004, TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
DHARWAD DISTRICT, DHARWAD-580001,
TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
DHARWAD SUB-DIVISION,
DHARWAD-580001, TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
4. THE TAHASILDAR, DHARWAD TALUKA,
DHARWAD-580001, TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B. P. MATHAPATI, ADV. FOR R1;
SRI. V. S. KALASURMATH, AGA FOR R2 TO R4)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S.4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH
COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED
ORDER DATED 11.02.2025 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION
NO.104662/2024 (LA-UDA) PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE
JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT AND ALLOW THE WRIT
PETITION NO.104662/2024 (LA-UDA) IN ITS ENTIRETY AND
ETC.
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10586-DB
WA No. 100171 of 2025
C/W WA No. 100172 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN WA NO.100172/2025
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SHANTABAI W/O. CHANDRAGOUDA @
CHANDRASHEKHAR DESAI,
AGE: 80 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O. MUMMIGATTI-580008,
TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
2. SMT. NEELAVVA W/O. YALLAPA CHIKKANNAVAR
AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE,
R/O. MUMMIGATTI-580008,
TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
3. BASAVARAJ S/O. CHANDRAGOUDA @
CHANDRASHEKHAR DESAI,
AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MUMMIGATTI-580008,
TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
4. SOMANGOUDA S/O. CHANDRAGOUDA @
CHANDRASHEKAR DESAI,
AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MUMMIGATTI-580008,
TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
5. SIDDANAGOUDA S/O. CHANDRAGOUDA @
CHANDRASHEKAR DESAI,
AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MUMMIGATTI-580008,
TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
6. ISHWAR S/O. GANGAPPA DESAI,
AGE: 80 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MUMMIGATTI-580008,
TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SHRIHARSH A.NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE)
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10586-DB
WA No. 100171 of 2025
C/W WA No. 100172 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND
1. THE UNION OF INDIA,
MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS,
TRANSPORT BHAWAN-1,
PARLIAMENT STREET,
NEW DELHI-110001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
NH-4, NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
(DHARWAD BELAGAVI SECTION), RAJATAGIRI,
GANDHINAGAR, DHARWAD-580004,
TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
DHARWAD DISTRICT, DHARWAD-580001,
TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
DHARWAD SUB-DIVISION,
DHARWAD-580001, TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
5. THE TAHASILDAR,
DHARWAD TALUKA,
DHARWAD-580001,
TQ/DIST. DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B. P. MATHAPATI, ADV. FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI. V. S. KALASURMATH, AGA FOR R3 TO R5)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S.4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH
COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED
ORDER DATED 11.02.2025 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION
NO.106834/2024 (LA-RES) PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE
JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT AND ALLOW THE WRIT
PETITION NO.106834/2024 (LA-RES) IN ITS ENTIRETY AND
ETC.
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10586-DB
WA No. 100171 of 2025
C/W WA No. 100172 of 2025
HC-KAR
THESE APPEALS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
ON 18.08.2025 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF
JUDGMENT, THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE
FOLLOWING:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL
CAV JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL)
W.A.No.100171/2025 filed by the appellant challenging the
order dated 11.02.2025 passed in W.P.No.104662/2024 (LA-
UDA) and W.A.No.100172/2025 filed by the appellant
challenging the order dated 11.02.2025 passed in
W.P.No.106834/2024 (LA-RES).
2. Brief facts leading to filing of these appeals are that
the appellant claimed to be the owner of land bearing
R.Sy.No.171/1 measuring 13 acre 20 guntas situated at
Mummigatti village, Dharwad. The portion of the land of the
appellant came to be acquired for the benefit of Karnataka
Industrial Area Development Board ('KIADB', for short) and
then by the National Highway Authority of India ('NHAI', for
short). The NHAI issued notice dated 29.07.2024 directing the
appellant to demolish the construction put up by him on the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10586-DB
HC-KAR
acquired land. The appellant challenged notice dated
29.07.2024 in W.P.No.104662/2024 and also challenged the
acquisition notification dated 28.05.2012, award passed by the
NHAI in W.P.No.106834/2024. Learned Single Judge dismissed
both the petitions. Being aggrieved, these appeals are filed.
3. Sri Shriharsh A.Neelopant, learned counsel for the
appellant submits that the appellant is in lawful possession and
enjoyment of the 1 acre 14 guntas and without any lawful
authority notice for demolition came to be issued by the
authority. It is submitted that the revenue records never
changed pursuant to the alleged acquisition. It is further
submitted that there is no payment vouchers produced by the
respondents for the 26 guntas of the remaining land which is in
possession of the appellant and no compensation paid which
has not been properly appreciated by the learned Single Judge
and proceeded to dismiss the writ petitions. It is also submitted
that the respondent - NHAI has never taken possession of 26
guntas of the land from the appellant and the appellant has
already constructed the building over the said property by
spending substantial amount. Hence, he seeks to quash the
acquisition to the aforesaid extent and also to quash the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10586-DB
HC-KAR
impugned notice of demolition dated 29.07.2024 by allowing
the appeals.
4. Per contra, Sri B.P.Mathapati, learned counsel
appearing for the respondent - NHAI supports the impugned
orders of the learned Single Judge and submits that the entire
land of the appellant is acquired, he has received
compensation, possession is taken and construction put up by
the appellant is in the property of the NHAI. The alleged
possession of the appellant is illegal and by encroachment
which has rightly been appreciated by learned Single Judge and
dismissed the writ petitions which does not call for any
interference. He seeks to dismiss the appeals.
5. We have heard the arguments of learned counsel
for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents and
meticulously perused the material on record. We have given
our anxious consideration to the submissions advanced.
6. The material on record indicate that the appellant
was the owner of land bearing R.Sy.No.171 measuring 14 acre
8 guntas situated at Mummigatti village as per the Akarband.
The said extent of land has been acquired by the different
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10586-DB
HC-KAR
authorities for different purposes. The particulars are extracted
herein below:
Sl. Year of Purpose of Extent
No. Acquisition Acquisition Acquired
Acre-Gunta
1. 1979 KIADB 9 - 34
2. 1978 The CALA, NHAI, 2 - 5
MINI, Vidhan
Soudha, Dharwad
3. 2001 SLAO, NH-4, 0 - 33
NHAI, Dharwad
4. 2014 SLAO, NH-4, 1 - 16
NHAI, Dharwad
Total Acquired Area 14 - 08
7. The aforesaid tabular form indicates that the entire
extent of the appellant's land was acquired for public purpose
from 1977 to 2014. The records produced by the NHAI clearly
indicate that the lands referred in the tabular form referred
supra, the award came to be passed, possession is taken and
compensation is paid. To substantiate the same, the NHAI has
produced copy of the award, JMC report as Annexure-R2 to R5.
Considering the aforesaid fact, the learned Single Judge clearly
recorded the finding that the challenge to the acquisition is a
decade after the acquisition and after receiving the
compensation. The claim of the appellant that he is in
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10586-DB
HC-KAR
possession of the portion of the land also has been negated by
the learned Single Judge on the ground that the appellant has
received the compensation amount and being fully aware that
the acquisition proceedings are completed, the appellant put up
the construction in portion of the land. In other words, the
alleged possession of the appellant is illegal and without any
authority of law. Taking note of the same, the authorities have
rightly issued the notice asking the appellant to demolish the
illegal structure in the acquired land. The finding recorded by
the learned Single Judge is strictly in consonance with the
material on record. The finding on record is neither illegal nor
perverse calling for interference. The NHAI has produced the
payment vouchers and possession certificate which further
demonstrate that the NHAI has taken possession of the land in
question and also paid compensation for the same and the
appellant has put up the alleged construction in portion of the
acquired land. For the illegalities committed by the appellant in
putting up construction in portion of the acquired land and non-
taking of steps either by the revenue authorities to effect the
revenue record in the name of the beneficiary of the acquisition
would not confer any right on the appellant. The initiation of
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10586-DB
HC-KAR
these proceedings by the appellant is an abuse of process of
law and required to be rejected.
8. For the aforementioned reasons, we proceed to
pass the following:
ORDER
Both writ appeals are devoid of merits and
accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
(S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL)
JUDGE
CLK
CT-AN
