Smt. Narayanappa v. The State of Karnataka

NC:(2026:KHC:4517( WP(No.(1992(of(2026( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

THDATED(THIS(THE(28 (DAY(OF(JANUARY,(2026(

BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(S(SUNIL(DUTT(YADAV( WRIT(PETITION(NO.(1992(OF(2026((LA-KIADB)( ( BETWEEN:((

( SMT.,NARAYANAPPA, S/O,KRISHNAPPA,

AGED,ABOUT,61,YEARS,, RESIDING,AT,BHAVANAHALLI,VILLAGE,,, MALUR,TALUK,,KOLAR,DISTRICT-563130.,

…PETITIONER, , (BY,SRI.,RAGHAVENDRA,GOWDA,K.,,ADVOCATE), ( AND:(

(

1., THE,STATE,OF,KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT,OF,COMMERCE,AND,INDUSTRIES,

VIKASA,SOUDHA,,,Digitally signedtiby BANGALORE-560001,, VIDYA0G0R REPRESENTED,BY,ITS,SECRETARY., Location: ,HIGH COURT0OF 2., THE,KARNATAKA,INDUSTRIAL, KARNATAKA AREA,DEVELOPMENT,BOARD,, EAST,WING,,KHANIZA,BHAVAN,, BANGALORE-560001,, REPRESENTED,BY,ITS,CHIEF,EXECUTIVE,OFFICER, AND,,EXECUTIVE,MEMBER., ,

3., THE,SPECIAL,LAND,ACQUISITION,OFFICER, HEAD,OFFICE,,KIADB,NO.14/1,,, STARAVINDA,BHAVAN,,1 ,FLOOR,,, ,

NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560001. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, AGA FOR R1; SRI. P.V. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE UNDATED GENERAL AWARD BEARING NO.KIADB/LAQ/2306/ 2023-24 VIDE ANNEXURE-A IN RESPECT OF PETITIONER PASSED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT 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

Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondent No.1. Sri. P. V. Chandrashekar, learned counsel accepts notice for respondents 2 and 3. The matter is taken up for disposal by consent.

¶2The petitioner has sought for issuance of writ of certiorari to set aside the general award at Annexure-A passed by respondent No.3 insofar as it relates to the land

bearing Sy. No.119, measuring 2 acres situated at Bhavanahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Malur Taluk, Kolar District, and issue writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in terms of Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (for short 'KIAD Act') and to pass consent award.

¶3The case of the petitioner is that she was willing for a consent award and accordingly, the question of passing of general award does not arise.

¶4Learned 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.

¶5In light of the said stand and taking note of the directions passed in W.P.No.15026/2021, the petition is disposed of as follows:

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

(ii) 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 Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶6It 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-A would stand revived.

¶7Liberty is reserved to the Special Land Acquisition Officer, KIADB to withdraw the amount, if deposited before the Civil Court pursuant to the general award.

¶8Accordingly, the petition is disposed of in terms of the above.

Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

VP