VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Karnataka High Court 2026 › High Court of Karnataka

Sri R Ramaiah v. State of Karnataka

DISPOSED
Court
High Court of Karnataka
Decided
22 April 2026
Bench
S Sunil Dutt Yadavauthor
Case no.
WP 11962/2026

Follow Karnataka High CourtFollow S Sunil Dutt Yadav

Judgment

e -e1e-eeeee e e NC:(2026:KHC:21913 WP(No.(11962(of(2026 IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU( NDDATED(THIS(THE(22 (DAY(OF(APRIL,(2026( BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(S(SUNIL(DUTT(YADAV( WRIT(PETITION(NO.(11962(OF(2026((LA-KIADB) BETWEEN:( SRI.,R.,RAMAIAH, S/O,M.C.,RAMAKRISHNAIAH,, AGED,ABOUT,66,YEARS,,, R/A,MACHANAHALLI,VILLAGE,, SOMPURA,HOBLI,,NELAMANGALA,TALUK,, BENGALURU,RURAL,DISTRICT-562,111., …PETITIONER, (BY,SRI.,VIRUPAKSHAIAH,P.H.,,ADVOCATE), AND:

1., STATE,OF,KARNATAKA,, REPRESENTED,BY,ITS,PRINCIPAL,SECRETARY,, Digitally DEPARTMENT,OF,COMMERCE,AND,INDUSTRIES,, signedtiby VIJAYA0P VIDHANA,SOUDHA,,, Location: BENGALURU,560,001., HIGH0COURT OF KARNATAKA

2., KARNATAKA,INDUSTRIAL,AREAS, DEVELOPMENT,BOARD,,, A,GOVERNMENT,OF,KARNATAKA,UNDERTAKING,,, NDNO.,14/3,,2 ,FLOOR,,RP,BUILDING,,, NRUPATHUNGA,ROAD,,, BENGALURU-560,001.,, REPRESENTED,BY,ITS,JOINT,DIRECTOR,, AND,CHIEF,EXECUTIVE,OFFICER., e -e2e-eeeee e e NC:(2026:KHC:21913 WP(No.(11962(of(2026

3., THE,SPECIAL,LAND,ACQUISITION,OFFICER-I,, (BMICP),AND,BENGALURU,RURAL,,, NELAMANGALA,TALUK,,, KARNATAKA,INDUSTRIAL,AREAS,, DEVELOPMENT,BOARD,,, NDNO.,14/3,,2 ,,FLOOR,,RP,BUILDING,,, NRUPATHUNGA,ROAD,,, BENGALURU,-,560,001., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SMT.,K.P.,YASHODHA,,AGA,FOR,R1;, ,,,,,,SRI.,VASANTHA,,ADV.,FOR,R2,AND,R3), , THIS, WP, IS, FILED, UNDER, ARTICLES, 226, AND, 227, OF, THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA, PRAYING, TO, ISSUE, WRIT, IN, THE, NATURE, OF, CERTIORARI, OR, ORDER, OR, DIRECTION, IN, THE, SIMILAR, NATURE, QUASHING, THE, IMPUGNED, GENERAL, AWARD, DATED, 13.09.2024, VIDE, ANNEXURE-B, BEARING, NO., RDKIADB/LAQ/727/2024-25, PASSED, BY, THE, 3 , , RESPONDENT, AUTHORITY,INSOFAR,AS,IT,RELATES,TO,THE,LAND,OWNED,BY, THE,PETITIONER,BEARING,SY.,NO.,122/1,MEASURING,TO,AN, EXTENT, OF, 12, GUNTAS, SITUATED, AT, MACHANAHALLI, VILLAGE,, SOMPURA, HOBLI,, NELAMANGALA, TALUK,, BANGALORE,RURAL,DISTRICT,AND,ETC.,,, , THIS, PETITION,, COMING, ON, FOR, PRELIMINARY,, HEARING,,THIS,DAY,,ORDER,WAS,MADE,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, CORAM:, HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,S,SUNIL,DUTT,YADAV

ORAL ORDER The petitioner has sought for setting aside of the general award dated 13.09.2024 insofar as it relates to the property of the petitioner bearing Sy.No.122/1 measuring to an extent of 12 guntas situated at Machanahalli Village, Sompura Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk, Bangalore Rural District and has sought for further direction in the nature of mandamus to the authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for award of compensation by way of an agreement in terms of Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966.

¶2The case of the petitioner is that he was willing for a consent award and accordingly, the question of passing of general award does not arise.

¶3Learned counsel for the respondent - Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (KIADB) submits that the petition itself could be disposed of while setting aside the general award insofar as the petitioner is concerned

and the respondent - Special Land Acquisition Officer, KIADB would consider the request of the petitioner and pass a consent award as per law.

¶4In light of the said stand, taking note of the directions passed in W.P.No.15026/2021, the petition is disposed of as follows:

(i) The petition is allowed.

(ii) The impugned general award at Annexure-B insofar as the petitioner's land is concerned, is set aside.

(iii) Respondent No.3 is directed to consider the claim of the petitioner for passing of consent award and pass a consent award in terms of Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶5It is made clear that, in the event if there is any dispute with regard to entitlement and apportionment of

the award amount, the general award at Annexure-B would stand revived.

¶6Liberty is reserved to the Special Land Acquisition Officer, KIADB to withdraw the amount, if deposited before the Civil Court pursuant to the general award.

¶7Accordingly, the petition is disposed of in terms of the above. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE MCR

Source: High Court of Karnataka, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.