- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:7395 WP No. 4784 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4784 OF 2025 (LA-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. SIDDARAJU S/O RANGASWAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS 2. SMT. JAYAMMA H R D/O RANGASWAMAIAH W/O. LATE NARASIMHARAJU AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT HONNENAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI-572120 TUMAKURU TALUK AND DISTRICT …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. V B SIDDARAMAIAH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-500 001 REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT. 2. THE SPECIAL LAO, TUMKUR-RAYADURGA NEW BROAD GAGE RAILWAY PROJECT, MINI VIDHAN SOUDHA, TUMKUR-572105 3. THE GENERAL MANAGER, Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7395 WP No. 4784 of 2025 SOUTH-WESTERN RAILWAYS, KESHAVAPURA, HUBLI- 580 023. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SPOORTHY HEGDE.N, HCGP FOR R1 & R2; V/O DTD: 19.02.2025 NOTICE TO R3 IS D/W) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE AWARD DATED 23.10.2013 BEARING NO: SLAO/S.R (TU-RAA RAILWAY) 06/2011-12, IN RESPECT OF SY. NO.13/5, MEASURING 131/4 GUNTAS, (IN TOTAL EXTENT OF 1 ACRE 34 GUNTAS) BELONGS TO THE PETITIONERS, LARGER EXTENT IS NOTIFIED IN THE NAME OF CHUNCHAIAH, SITUATED AT HONNENAHALLI (PART- 3) VILLAGE, VIDE ANNEXURE-B, PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2, THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, TUMKUR- RAYADURGA BROAD GAUGE RAILWAY PROJECT, MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, TUMAKURU IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER CONCERNED AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER The case of the petitioners is that they are the absolute owner of the land bearing Sy.No.13/5, measuring 131/4 ( in total extent of 1 acre 34 guntas) situated at Honnenahalli viallage, Surapur Taluka, which was notified for acquisition by respondent-authority for formation of Tumakur-Rayadurga Railway Project, in terms of the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7395 WP No. 4784 of 2025 notification dated 23.08.2011 and final notification dated 22.06.2012. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit though the above award was passed on 23.10.2013 in respect of acquired land belonging to the petitioner, the same had not been deposited. In the meanwhile, new act the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 came into effect on 01.01.2014. He refers to order of co- ordinate Bench of this Court in WP No.23524-23537/2014 and 26802-26807/2014 dated 21.07.2016 produced at Annexure-E with this writ petition, wherein the co-ordinate bench of this Court under the similar factual aspect of the matter in respect of the very same notification and the claimants therein whose land was acquired for the same purpose, has passed following order: 7. Now the Court is required to examine whether the impugned award notices are sustainable and if they are not sustainable what relief is to be given to the petitioners. To answer this question, the advertence is - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:7395 WP No. 4784 of 2025 required to be made to the provisions contained in Section 24 of the 2013 Act: “24. Land acquisition process under Act No.1 of 1894 shall be deemed to have lapsed in certain cases.– (1) xxxxxxxxxxxx (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub- section (1), in case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894), where an award under the said section 11 has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of this Act but the physical possession of the land has not been taken or the compensation has not been paid the said proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed and the appropriate Government, if it so chooses, shall initiate the proceedings of such land acquisition afresh in accordance with the provisions of the Act: Provided that where an award has been made and compensation in respect of a majority of land holdings has not been deposited in the account of the beneficiaries, then, all beneficiaries specified in the notification for acquisition under section 4 of the said Land Acquisition Act, shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Act.” 8. The perusal of the afore-extracted provisions reveals that if compensation amounts in respect of majority of land holdings are not deposited as on the date of the commencement of the said Act (1.1.2014), then the compensation is required to be determined as per the provisions of the said 2013 Act. In the instant case it is not in dispute that the compensation amount in respect of the majority of - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:7395 WP No. 4784 of 2025 land holdings is not deposited. The compensation amounts are deposited only in respect of 9 acres 34½ guntas out of the acquired extent measuring 47 acres 24¾ guntas. As the afore-extracted provisions are attracted to the facts of this case, I quash the impugned award notices and direct the respondent No.4 or any other concerned functionary to re- determine the compensation in accordance with the provisions of the 2013 Act. This exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible and in any case within an outer limit of four months from the date of the issuance of the certified copy of today’s order. 9. Needless to observe that if any of the petitioners has already received the compensation, that amount has to be deducted from the amounts to be re- determined under the provisions of the 2013 Act." 3. He further refers to orders of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WP No.18279/2021 dated 25.01.2022 and order in WP Nos.56/2023 dated 23.10.2024 and submits that there is consistent following of the same order providing the benefit of granting compensation under the new act namely the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:7395 WP No. 4784 of 2025 Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. Hence, seeks for allowing the petition on similar lines. 4. Learned AGA does not dispute the aforesaid factual and legal aspect of the matter. 5. Accordingly the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The award dated 23.10.2013 passed by the 2nd respondent authority as per Annexure- B is hereby quashed, the respondent authorities to re-determine the compensation in accordance with the provision of the Act-2013, in the light of the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench in WP Nos.23524-23537/2014 and 26802- 26807/2014 dated 21.07.2016. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE ASN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19