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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 13136

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
M.NAGAPRASANNA
MR KARUNAKARA SHETTY – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WP 34072/2024



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION No.34072 OF 2024 (LA - KIADB)

BETWEEN:

MR.KARUNAKARA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, LATE MARAPPA NAIK, R/O. NO.9/133, TAROLI HOUSE, KUKKATTE POST, MOGARU, DAKSHINA KANNADA – 574 144 AADHAAR NO. 5499-0050-1449.

... PETITIONER (BY SRI M.S.BHAGWAT, SR.ADVOCATE A/W SRI KRISHNA S.VYAS, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001.

2 . THE KARNATAKA STATE INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT

4TH AND 5TH FLOOR, EAST WING, KHANIJA BHAVANA, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001.

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.

3 . THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, KARNATAKA STATE INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, BYKAMPADI, MANGALURU, DAKSHIN KANNADA – 575 011.

4 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND PRESIDENT, PRICE FIXATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT, MANGALURU, DAKSHIN KANNADA – 575 011.

... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SESHU V., HCGP FOR R1 AND R4;

SRI BASAVARAJ V.SABARAD, SR. ADVOCATE A/W SRI H.L.PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 AND R-3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO I. DECLARE THAT THE IMPUGNED FINAL NOTIFICATION BEARING NO.CI 312 IPQ 2009, DATED 08/01/2010, PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE ON 11/01/2010 VIDE ANNEXURE-G, ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT, INSOFAR AS IT PERTAINS TO THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY BELONGING TO THE PETITIONER, BEING THE PROPERTY AT SL.NO.12 CARVED OUT OF SY.NO.164/2 OF BADAGA ULIPADI VILLAGE, HAS LAPSED BY VIRTUE OF THE PROVISIONS UNDER SECTION 24(2) OF THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION, AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013, AND DUE TO THE FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT THE ACQUISITION WITHIN A REASONABLE PERIOD; iA: ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE IMPUGNED GENERAL AWARD BEARING NO.L.A.Q.SR.2/2006-07 DATED 18/08/2022 (ANNEXURE –P), PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT; ii. ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE NECESSARY CORRECTIONS IN THE RTCS, THEREBY SETTING ASIDE THE CHANGES EFFECTUATED IN THE RTC BY UNLAWFULLY REPLACING THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER WITH THAT OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT, WITH RESPECT TO THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY; iiB: IN THE ALTERNATIVE, DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO DETERMINE AND PAY COMPENSATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHAVILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013, BASED ON THE MARKET VALUE AS ON THE DATE OF AWARD DATED 18/08/2022, TOGETHER WITH CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS.

THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

CAV ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question a Final Notification dated 08-01-2010 issued by the 1st respondent contending that acquisition has lapsed by virtue of the provisions of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

2. Heard Sri M.S. Bhagwat, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner; Sri Seshu V, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 4 and Sri Basavaraj V.Sabarad, learned senior counsel appearing for respondents 2 and

3.

3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows: -

3.1. The petitioner claims to be the owner of land measuring

4.5 acres in Sy.No.164/2 and land measuring 2.11 acres in Sy.No.232/4 of Badaga Ulipadi Village, Gurupura Hobli, Mangalore Taluk, Dakshina Kannada District. The petitioner is said to have set up a rubber processing industry in the subject property after obtaining all statutory clearances. On 19-08-2006, the Board issues a preliminary notification under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Indus

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