An agreement holder without a registered title cannot challenge land acquisition proceedings or claim compensation under established law.

ORDER :

K.S.HEMALEKHA, J.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

“a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the Final Notification No.CI 112 SPQ 2024 dated 30.12.2024 issued by Respondent No.1 (Commerce & Industries Dept., GoK) under Section 28 (1) of the KIAD Act insofar as it pertains to the Petitioner’s land bearing Sy. No.208/1 (Old Sy.208), measuring 2 Acres 19 Guntas, of Hulikunte Village, Doddaballapura Taluk [ANNEXURE-K];

b) Declare that the acquisition proceedings under the KIAD Act initiated vide the aforesaid Preliminary Notification have lapsed and are null and void with respect to Sy.No.208/1 (2A-19G) the Petitioner being the lawful owner thereof by virtue of Sale Deed dated 15.05.2019 (Annexure- C), and consequently direct the Respondents to treat the Petitioner’s title and possession over Sy.208/1 as free from any acquisition or claim by the State or KIADB;

c) Issue a writ of mandamus directing Respondent Nos.2 to 4 to forthwith drop all proceedings to dispossess the Petitioner from the lands in his possession, including the land in Sy. No.207, Hulikunte Village, and to consider and adjudicate the Petitioner’s objections dated 19.05.2025 (Annexure-P) in accordance with law and principles of natural justice, before taking any further steps pursuant to the Final Notification dated 30.12.2024 or the acquisition of 26 Guntas in Sy.207;

d) Direct Respondent No.2-KIADB and its LAO (Respondent No.3) that, in the event of finalising any award or disbursing any compensation for the acquired 26 Guntas in Sy. No.207, they shall not release the entire compensation to any private party without apportionment or securing the Petitioner’s claim, and shall instead deposit the disputed portion of compensation in a court of competent jurisdiction under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act read with Section 30 of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894, or otherwise secure the same, pending resolution of the Petitioner’s rights by a civil court or amicable settlement;

e) Grant an interim order of injunction and stay, restraining the Respondents, their officers, subordinates or any persons acting through them from interfering with the Petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of lands in Sy. Nos.207 and 208/1, Hulikunte Village including by way of taking possession, demolishing structures/crops, or initiating civil or police action to dispossess, and further restraining the Respondents from disbursing or distributing any compensation amount in respect of Sy. No.207 to the exclusion of the Petitioner, pending disposal of this writ petition;

f) Award costs of this petition and proceedings to the Petitioner, given the oppressive and arbitrary actions of the Respondents necessitating this litigation; and g) Pass such other writ, order, or direction as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity, including but not limited to directing an inquiry into the conduct of Respondent officials in mishandling the acquisition process, or directing the Respondents to compensate the Petitioner for the losses suffered due to violation of his constitutional rights.”

Brief facts:

2. The petitioner claims rights over land bearing Survey No.207 (2 acres 10 guntas), and 208/1 (2 acres 19 guntas) of Hulikunte Village, Doddaballapura Talu