SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 105766

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
K S HEMALEKHA
VISHAKANTA N – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WP 35222/2025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 35222 OF 2025 (LA-KIADB)

BETWEEN:

1. VISHAKANTA N, S/O. LATE NINGEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/AT. NO.C-3 BLOOMING MEADOWS, 2ND FLOOR, 9TH MAIN ROAD, KRISHNA GARDEN, RR NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 098.

2. P. NAGRAJ, S/O. PUTTASWAMMANNA, R/AT. NO.287/31, 17 CROSS, MTS LAYOUT, KENGERI UPANAGARA, BANGALORE SOUTH, Digitally signed by BANGALORE- 560 060.

MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH …PETITIONERS COURT OF (BY SRI. SHARAN N.MAJAGE.,ADVOCATE)

KARNATAKA AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-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.

3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, NO.14/3, 1ST FLOOR, CFC BUILDING, MAHARSHI ARAVINDA BHAVAN, NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.

4. METRO RAIL CORPORATION LIMITED, BMTC COMPLEX, 3RD FLOOR, K.H. ROAD, SHANTINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 027.

REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISHA A.S, AGA FOR R1;

SRI.H.L.PRADEEP KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE GENERAL AWARD BEARING NO.KIADB/METRO/BHUSWA. R2E-122A/2020-21 DATED 15.12.2020 PASSED BY THE R3 IN RESPECT OF LAND IN SY. NO. 159/28, PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NO. R2E-122A (4525/159/28) MEASURING TO AN EXTENT OF 120 SQ. MTRS SITUATED AT KENGERI VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS PROPERTIES ARE CONCERNED WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNX-D AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

ORAL ORDER

Learned Addl. Government Advocate accepts notice for respondent No.1.

2. Petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

“i) Issue writ of certiorari quashing the General Award bearing No.KIADB/METRO/BhuSwa/R2E- A/2020-21 dated:15.12.2020 passed by the Respondent No.3 in respect of land in Sy. No.159/28, Property Identification NO.R2E-122A (4525/159/28) measuring to an extent of 120 Sq.Mtrs situated Kengeri Village, Kengeri Hobli, Bangalore South, in so far as the Petitioners properties are concerned, which is produced as ANNEXURE-D.

ii) Issue any suitable order, direction or writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents herein to consider the case of the petitioners as per Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act.

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."

3. Learned counsel on both sides submit that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by several decisions of this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the absolute owner of the land bearing Sy.No.159/28 measuring 32 Guntas, situated at Kengeri Village, Kengeri Hobli, Bangalore South (for short 'the schedule property'). The said land has been acquired by the respondent-State for the benefit of respondent No.4. It is further submitted that the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) has passed a general award and being aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is willing to accept compensation by way of a consent award under Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (‘KIAD Act, 1966’ for short).

6. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and

3-KIADB submits that if the petitioner is willing to accept the compensation in terms of Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act, 1966, the same will be duly considered by the authority in accordance with law.

7. The submission is placed on record.

8. Under identical circumstances, a Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top