- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18588 WP No. 4057 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 4057 OF 2025 (LA-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. T. SRINIVASA, S/O THEMMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, NO.10, BLOCK NO.12, MADHUVANA LAYOUT, SRIRAMPURA 2ND STAGE, MYSORE - 570 023. 2. SRI. T. RAMESH S/O THEMMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.33A, 4TH MAIN ROAD, 4TH CROSS, JAYANAGAR, CHAMRAJ MOHALA, MYSORE - 570 014. OLD ADDRESS: NO.1560 'C' AND 'D' BLOCK, SHIVARAM MARGA, KUVEMPU NAGAR, MYSORE - 570 023. 3. SMT. T. SUSHEELA, W/O M.C. SHIVANNA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.564, 'M' BLOCK, KUVEMPUNAGAR, 2ND STAGE, MYSORE - 570 023. OLD ADDRESS: NO.22, BLOCK NO.3, MADHUVANA LAYOUT, SRIRAMPURA 2ND STAGE, MYSORE - 570 023. Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18588 WP No. 4057 of 2025 4. SMT. CHENNAMMA W/O THIMMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, NO.10, BLOCK NO.12, MADHUVANA LAYOUT, SRIRAMPURA 2ND STAGE, MYSORE- 570 023. [SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMING] …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. RAVINDRA P, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. 2. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JHANSI RANI LAKSHMI BAI ROAD, MYSORE - 570 005. (AMENDED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 16.04.2025) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. T.P. VIVEKANANDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ORDER THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 28A OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT WITHIN REASONABLE TIME AS PRESCRIBED THIS HONBLE COURT (ANNEXURE-E1, E2, E3 AND E4). THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18588 WP No. 4057 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioners are before this Court seeking the following prayer: “a) issue a writ of Certiorari or any other writ or order the Respondent to consider the application under Section 28A of Land Acquisition Act within reasonable time as prescribed this Hon’ble Court (Annexure – E-1, E-2, E-3 and E-4) b) Grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems it fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of this case.” 2. Heard Sri Ravindra P., learned counsel for petitioners, Sri Spoorthy Hegde N., learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri T.P.Vivekananda, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 3. The backdrop of seeking reference of the applications of the petitioners filed under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) is that, the lands belonging to the petitioners become the subject matter of acquisition in January, 1992, by issuance of a preliminary - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18588 WP No. 4057 of 2025 notification. The final notification was issued on 21.04.1998. A general award comes to be passed on 15.07.1999. The litigations thereafter galore between the parties. On 11.08.2004, respondent No.2 is said to have deposited the compensation of Rs.1,93,937/- in favour of the petitioners. The petitioners filed a miscellaneous first appeal seeking enhancement of compensation, which comes to be withdrawn seeking liberty to approach the appropriate forum. It is then, applications under Section 18 of the Act to refer the matter to the reference Court. After which, applications are filed under Section 28A of the Act seeking re-determination of compensation. It is the applications seeking re-determination of the compensation is what has driven the petitioners to this Court in the subject petition. 4. Sri T.P.Vivekananda, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the applications of the petitioners, in strict consonance of law would be considered, if reasonable time is granted. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18588 WP No. 4057 of 2025 5. In the light of fact that the issue being of the year 1992 and the petitioners are still wanting to get higher compensation are seeking re-determination of compensation in terms of Section 28A of the Act, I deem it appropriate to direct respondent No.2 to pass necessary orders on the applications filed under Section 28A of the Act, within an outer limit of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, if not earlier. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed. It is made clear that the Court has not considered the case of the petitioners on its merit. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE nvj List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8 CT: BHK