Karnataka High Court
Sri.Subramanya D vs The State Of Karnataka on 17 June, 2025
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:20713
WP No. 16832 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION NO. 16832 OF 2025 (LA-KIADB)
BETWEEN:
SRI SUBRAMANYA D.,
S/O ANJINAPPA
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
R/AT NO. 217/308
MUNISWAMAPPA LAYOUT
NEAR RAILWAY STATION
KODIGEHALLI, SAHAKARANAGARA POST
BENGALURU - 560 092.
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT. CHITHRALEKHA H. R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
by NAGAVENI
BY ITS SECRETARY
Location: High
Court of DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Karnataka
AND INDUSTRIES, VIDHANA SOUDHA
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL
AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD
REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER
KHANIJA BHAVANA, RACE COURSE ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 001.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:20713
WP No. 16832 of 2025
HC-KAR
3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL
AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD
NO.14/3, 1ST FLOOR, CFC BUILDING
MAHARSHI ARAVINDA BHAVAN
NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SESHU V., 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
GENERAL AWARD BEARING NO. KIADB/LAQ/2051/2023-24
DATED 06.06.2023 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 IN
RESPECT OF LAND IN SY. NO. 109/3 MEASURING 1 ACRE 21
GUNTAS SITUATED AT DODDAGOLLAHALLI VILLAGE, KUNDANA
HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT,
IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED, WHICH IS
PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-C.
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 petitioner is at the doors of this Court seeking the
following prayer:
"i) Issue writ of certiorari quashing the General Award
bearing No.KIADB/LAQ/2051/2023-24 dated:
06.06.2023 passed by the Respondent No.3 in
respect of land in Sy.No.109/3 measuring 1 Acre 21
Guntas situated at Doddagollahalli Village, Kundana
Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, Bangalore Rural District, in
NC: 2025:KHC:20713
HC-KAR
so far as the Petitioner is concerned, which is
produced as ANNEXURE - C.
ii) Issue any suitable order, direction or writ in the
nature of mandamus directing the respondent herein
to consider the case of the petitioner as per section
29(2) of the KIADB Act and direct the Respondent
No.3 to withdraw the amount deposited in the
reference court.
iii) Pass such other order, writ or direction as the Hon'ble
Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the
case including costs."
2. Heard Smt. Chitralekha H.R., learned counsel for
petitioner, Sri Sheshu V., learned High Court Government
Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri H.L.Pradeep Kumar,
learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3.
3. Learned counsel appearing to the petitioners submits
in plethora of identical matters, coordinate benches of this
Court has considered the issue and answered in favour of the
petitioner. One such order passed by the coordinate bench of
this Court in W.P.No.12671/2025, disposed on 26.04.2025, has
allowed the petition and directed the respondents to consider
the case of the petitioner therein and pass necessary orders in
accordance with law.
NC: 2025:KHC:20713
HC-KAR
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader would not
dispute the position of law; the identical circumstance and
afore-quoted judgment rendered by the coordinate bench of
this Court.
5. This Court in W.P.No.12671/2025, disposed on
26.04.2025, has held as follows:
"2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
a General Award has been passed only on the ground that
the petitioner was absent when the matter was heard by
the Special Land Acquisition Officer for award of
compensation, as could be seen in the discussions made
in the General Award dated 24.08.2017 at Annexure-'D'.
3. Learned counsel submits that this Court has held
in several matters including the recent decision in the
case of Harisha.R /vs./ State of Karnataka and others in
W.P.No.12703/2023 dated 27.06.2023 following an
earlier decision in W.P.No. 6198/2015, that the land loser
would be entitled for a better price as compensation
instead of determination under a General Award. As a
consequence, all such matters where it was found that a
General Award was passed only on some technical ground
that the land loser was not present at the time of hearing
or such other technical reasons, this Court was of the
considered opinion that since the land loser would get a
better price if the compensation is awarded in terms of
the agreement and not under a General Award, the award
may be passed in terms of an agreement. Therefore, the
learned counsel submits that similar benefit should be
given to the petitioner.
4. On going through the following judgments, which
were rendered by this Court:
NC: 2025:KHC:20713
HC-KAR
i) Smt. Rukmani v/s State of Karnataka-W.P
No.39611-39612/2016 dated 16.09.2016;
ii) Sri.Basavaraju vs. State of Karnataka
- W.P.No.34071/2017 dated 28.08.2017;
iii) Sri.Rajanna vs. State of Karnataka -
W.P.No.51362/2016 dated 21.03.2018;
iv) Smt.Ningamma vs. state of Karnataka
- W.P.No.6198/2015 dated 25.08.2015;
v) Sri.Bhyraiah vs. State of Karnataka -
W.P.No.40896/2017 dated 24.01.2019.
this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner
is entitled for similar relief as was given in the cases
mentioned hereinabove.
5. Consequently, the following:
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed.
(ii) The impugned General Award dated
24.08.2017 at Annexure-'D' insofar as the
petitioner's land is concerned is set aside.
(iii) The respondent-Special Land Acquisition
Officer, KIADB is directed to reconsider the
request of the petitioner for award of
compensation by way of an agreement
under Section 29(2) of the Karnataka
Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 and
pass necessary orders within a period of
three months from the date of receipt of a
copy of this order.
(iv) The respondent - Special Land Acquisition
Officer, KIADB, is at liberty to withdraw the
amount that has been deposited by it
pursuant to the General Award before the
jurisdictional court.
(v) Needless to state that in the event of any
dispute, the General Award would stand
restored."
NC: 2025:KHC:20713
HC-KAR
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
NVJ
CT:SS
