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) 21115

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
S Sunil Dutt Yadav, J
B Y Vishesh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka – Respondent
WP No. 23160 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Raveendra G. Kolle
For the Respondents: A.S. Harish, M R C Ravi, Nagaiah

Courts will not interfere with technical project alignments or expert-driven infrastructure designs under judicial review unless there is clear evidence of mala fides, illegality, or irrationality, as such matters fall within the exclusive domain of expert bodies.

Headnote:(A) Land Acquisition Act, 2013 - Section 11(1) - Alignment of project pipelines - Challenge to - Scope of judicial review - Petitioners sought change in pipeline alignment on their land asserting no technical prejudice - Respondent authorities maintained that the approved Detailed Project Report (DPR) parameters regarding water velocity, pressure, and surge protection would be compromised by deviations - Held, courts are ill-equipped to decide on technical/scientific matters and must defer to expert bodies in the absence of mala fides - Interference at an advanced stage of project implementation would lead to cost escalation and delay - Writ petition dismissed. (Paras 24, 25, 28, 30)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners challenged an order rejecting their request to realign a pipeline project passing through their land. The project aims to fill lakes in specific talukas. Following a previous court order directed to consider their representations, the Land Acquisition Officer rejected the request based on technical reports from the executing authority, noting that the project alignment was finalized in the approved DPR and that deviations would impact technical parameters such as water velocity and flow pressure.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the alignment was frozen upon the approval of the DPR. It noted that the petitioners' reliance on a private consultant's report could not override the expert assessment of State engineers. Judicial review in such technical matters is limited to cases of mala fides or clear illegality, neither of which was established here.

Issues: Whether the court should direct a change in project alignment based on the property owners' request and whether the proposed changes are technically and financially viable.

Ratio Decidendi: In technical and scientific matters, the judiciary must exercise self-restraint and defer to the findings of expert bodies unless the decision exhibits mala fides or irrationality, particularly when the project is at an advanced stage of execution.

Result: Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. overview of the alignment dispute and technical constraints of the project. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
2. judicial review of technical expert decisions is limited. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH OR SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 09.07.2025 AT NO.LAQ.CR/34/2021-22 PASSED BY 3RD RESPONDENT ASST. COMMISSIONER AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A, AS THE SAME IS OPPOSED TO LAW AS ALSO ARBITRARY AND WITHOUT THE APPLICATION OF MIND AND/OR ETC.

THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 08.04.2026 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

CAV ORDER

The petitioners, who are the land owners have sought to challenge the order at Annexure-'A' dated 09.07.2025 passed by respondent No.3 - Assistant Commissioner and the Land Acquisition Officer, Tarikere. The order at Annexure-'A' is passed by the Land Acquisition officer, whereby, the representations of the petitioners regarding change of alignment has been rejected on the basis of technical report and decision has been taken for furtherance of the Project.

2. The facts are that on 03.12.2022, the Notification was published in the Official Gazette under Section 11(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-settlement, Act 2013 [for brevity, 'Land Acquisition Act, 2013'] for acquiring an extent of 16.00 guntas of petitioners' land bearing Survey No.309/1 of Doranalu Village, Kasaba Hobli, Tarikere Taluka, Chikkamagalur District for the purpose of 'Tarikere & Kadur Tank Filling Project'. It is made out that the Award has been passed and compensation has been deposited before the Reference Court. However, parallelly, the petitioners have been making representations seeking for change in the alignment of the Project on the ground that the proposed Pipeline from the Bhadra Project which would pump water into the lakes in Tarikere, Kadur and Chikkamagaluru runs through the petitioners' property bifurcating the petitioners' land into different portions.

3. It is the stand of the petitioners that slight deviation would not cause any financial prejudice and in fact, the Pipeline could be laid on the Northern side of the land bearing Survey No.309/1 belonging to the petitioners instead of implementing the Project in terms of the existing alignment that bifurcates the petitioners' land into two portions.

4. The petitioners had made representations on 29.12.2022 (Annexure-'F') and 24.04.2023 (Annexure-'G') seeking change of alignment and non-consideration of the same has led the petitioners to file Writ Petition No. 14380/2023, which came to be disposed of on 04.12.2024 with a direction to consider the representations/objections of the petitioners.

5. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 04.12.2024 passed in W.P.No.14380/2023, the Special Land Acquisition Officer has passed a detailed order on 09.07.2025 at Annexure-'A' considering the representations for change in alignment. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, in terms of the Report submitted by the Assistant Executive Engineer, Visvesvaraya Jala Nigama Limited, Upper Bhadra Project, whereby, it was opined that the alignment could not be changed, has passed the impugned order.

6. In the order of the Special Land Acquisition Officer dated 09.07.2025, there has been consideration of the request of petitioners for issue of Corrigendum to the Gazette Notification dated 03.12.2022 issued under Section 11(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013.

7. The said order refers to the report of the Assistant Executive Engineer, Kaduru and lists out the prominent points of the report which are extracted hereinbelow: -

" ¸ ÀºÁAi ÀÄP À PÁAi ÀÄð¥Á®P À EAf¤AiÀÄgï P Àq ÀÆgÀÄ EªÀg ÀÄ

1. ¥ ÉÊ¥ï ¯ÉÊ£ï ¥À

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