- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8910 WP No. 5989 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 5989 OF 2025 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. ASHWATH GOWDA. B. N. S/O NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.16 BYRADENAHALLI VILLAGE ALURDUDDANAHALLI KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562110 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHARAN N MAJAGE., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001. 2. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER KHANIJA BHAVANA RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU-560001. 3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-2 KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO.14/3, 1ST FLOOR, CFC BUILDING, Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8910 WP No. 5989 of 2025 MAHARSHI ARAVINDA BHAVAN NRUPATUNGA ROAD BENGALURU-560001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP SRI. H.L.PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3.) THIS WP IS FILED PRAYING TO QUASHING THE GENERAL AWARD BEARING NO. KIADB/LAQ//2024-25 DATED 14.11.2024 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 IN RESPECT OF LAND IN SY. NO.66/2 MEASURING 05 GUNTAS SITUATED AT BEERASANDRA VILLAGE, KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED, WHICH IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-E. AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER The petitioner is claiming to be the owner of the land in Sy.No.66/2 measuring 05 guntas situated at Beerasandra Village, Kundana Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, Bangalore Rural District, which was purchased by his mother in the year 2001, is before this Court in this - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8910 WP No. 5989 of 2025 petition seeking quash of the general award dated 14.11.2024 passed by respondent No.3 at Annexure - E. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only reason on which the general award has been passed is that the petitioner had not filed the claim petition. He further submits that the petitioner has not been afforded an opportunity to seek payment of compensation in terms of Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the 'KIADB Act' for short). Hence, he seeks for quashing the general award. 3. Sri H.L.Pradeep, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3-KIADB on the other hand, submits that if the representation is made, request of the petitioner will be considered for the payment of compensation under Section 29(2) of the KIADB Act. 4. The submission is taken on record. 5. Accordingly, the following: - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:8910 WP No. 5989 of 2025 ORDER (i). Writ petition is allowed in part. (ii). Impugned General Award dated 14.11.2024 produced at Annexure-E passed by the respondent No.3-KIADB insofar as the property of the petitioner herein is concerned, is hereby quashed. (iii). Respondent No.3-KIADB is directed to consider the case of the petitioner herein in terms of the Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966, upon the petitioner satisfying all the requirement thereof. Needless to state that in the event of any dispute, the general award would stand restored. (iv). Respondent No.3-KIADB is directed to withdraw the amount in deposit before the Competent Court, if any, and disburse to the petitioner herein, in terms of the observation made above, in accordance with law. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE KTY/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27