- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23251-DB CCC No. 268 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 268 OF 2023 BETWEEN: SRI VENKATESH BABU S/O LATE CHIKKAPPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT HOUSE NO 2279, 9TH MAIN ROAD, ‘D’ BLOCK, 2ND STAGE, RAJAJINAGARA, BENGALURU-560 010 …COMPLAINANT (BY SRI. M.R. RAJAGOPAL, SENIOR COUNSEL, FOR SRI. GIRISHA .T.R, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. GIRISH R, IAS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER, KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, NO 49, 4TH AND 5TH FLOORS, ‘EAST WING’, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU -560 001. Digitally signed by K S RENUKAMBA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23251-DB CCC No. 268 of 2023 2. BALAPPA HUNDIGUNDA, KAS SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-II, KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, NO 49, 4TH AND 5TH FLOORS, ‘EAST WING’ KANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001, PRESENTLY AT BMICP, BENGALURU RURAL, ARVINDA BHAVANA, NRUPATUNGA ROAD, OPPOSITE TO RBI, BENGALURU-560 001. 3. DR.MAHESH .M, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER, KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, NO.49, 4TH AND 5TH FLOORS, ‘EAST WING’, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. 4. SRI. TEJAS KUMAR, S/O NAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-II, KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, NO.49, 4TH AND 5TH FLOORS, ‘EAST WING’, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23251-DB CCC No. 268 of 2023 BENGALURU-560 001. PRESENTLY AT BMICP BENGALURU RURAL, ARVINDA BHAVANA, NRUPATUNGA ROAD, OPPOSITE TO RBI, BENGALURU-560 001. A3 AND A4 MADE AS A PARTY AS PER THE COURT ORDER DATED 18.03.2025 AND CAUSE TITLE AMENDED. …ACCUSED (BY SRI. K.SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL A/W SRI. H.L. PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR A1 TO A4) THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR WILFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE FINAL ORDER DATED 23.12.2020 PASSED IN W.P.NO.5463/2020 AND JUDGMENT DATED 04.11.2022 PASSED IN W.A.NO.513/2021. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL and HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL) Sri M.R. Rajagopal, learned senior counsel appearing for Sri Girisha T.R., Advocate on record for complainant, submits - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23251-DB CCC No. 268 of 2023 that the complainant is not pressing I.A. No.1/2024. Therefore, I.A. No.1/2024 is disposed of as not pressed. 2. This complaint arises out of the order of the learned Single Judge dated 23.12.2020 passed in Writ Petition No.5463/2020 (LA-KIADB) which was partially modified in Writ Appeal No.513/2021 (LA-KIADB) connected with W.A. Crob. Nos.3/2021 and 4/2021 (LA-KIADB). 3. The records show that the complainant sought quashing of notification under Section 28(3) of Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board Act, 1966 (for short ‘Act of 1966’). The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition in terms of para 22 of judgment, which reads as under : “22. In that view of the matter the following order is passed: (i) Petitioner is not entitled for restoration of land to the extent of 2 acres 31 guntas in Sy.No.55P of Yettiganahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District. (ii) Petitioner is entitled to compensation for the aforementioned land in terms of new Act, 2013. In the result, respondent Nos.2 and 3 are hereby directed to proceed in enlarging compensation in terms of the aforementioned Act, 2013 and disburse the compensation amount along with interest @ 6% per annum, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23251-DB CCC No. 268 of 2023 within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order. (iii) Writ Petition is allowed in part. Leaving the parties to bear their respective costs.” 4. Respondents-accused challenged the said order before the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.513/2021 (LA-KIADB) connected with W.A. Crob. Nos.3/2021 and 4/2021 (LA-KIADB). The Division Bench has partly allowed the appeal of the accused, whereunder, the order for acquisition of land to an extent of 2 acres 31 guntas was confirmed and direction was issued to pass award in terms of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short ‘Act of 2013’). However, the order awarding interest at 6% per annum was reversed by the Division Bench. 5. The above complaint is filed alleging that there is disobedience of the aforesaid order by the respondents-accused and the compensation is not paid within four months from the date of receipt of the judgment in the writ appeal. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23251-DB CCC No. 268 of 2023 6. The land was acquired in the year 1994 and possession of land said to have been taken in the year 1996. Further, the Act of 2013 came into force from 01.01.2014. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court by an order dated 09.11.2023 directed KIADB and SLAO to notionally treat 2012-2013 as the base year for the limited purpose of determining and paying the compensation in terms of Section 26 of Act of 2013. Unnumbered para 4 of the said order, which is relevant for the purpose of this case, reads as follows: “In the above circumstances, as a last chance, we direct the respondents KIADB and the SLAO to notionally treat 2012-2013 as the base year for the limited purpose of determining and paying the compensation in terms of Section 26, though the subject Preliminary Notification was issued way back in July 1994. Only such an exercise if accomplished, can be said to be the due compliance of the order which directed "to proceed in enlarging compensation in terms of the aforementioned Act, 2013 ...". In view of the above, the KIADB shall undertake a fresh exercise of determining the compensation by adopting the course indicated above and come out with an additional compliance affidavit within two weeks.” (Emphasis supplied) - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23251-DB CCC No. 268 of 2023 7. In compliance with the order dated 09.11.2023, accused have passed general award on 07.12.2023 under Section 26, which is produced as Annexure-R3 to the additional compliance affidavit dated 21.06.2024 and submitted before this Court on 24.06.2024. 8. Sri M.R. Rajagopal, learned Senior counsel, submits that in passing the said award, the SLAO has not followed the norms prescribed under Sections 26, 28, 30 and 80 of Act of 2013, which relates to determination of market value, solatium and interest. Therefore, there is no compliance of the award. 9. As noted earlier, the order of the learned Single Judge was to pass award in terms of Act of 2013. This Court in the order dated 09.11.2023 made the year 2012-2013 as base period for determining the compensation in terms of Section 26. As per Annexure-R.3 the said award is passed claiming the same to be in accordance with Section 26. If according to the complainant the award is contrary to Section 26, then his remedy lies under Section 64 of the Act of 2013 seeking reference to the Authority specified under Section 51 of the Act, to challenge the same. Since the award is passed and delay in - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23251-DB CCC No. 268 of 2023 passing the award is explained, the same is found acceptable. There are no grounds to proceed to frame charges against the accused. 10. Therefore, reserving liberty to the complainant to question the award in appropriate proceedings, the contempt proceeding is dropped. The amount in deposit before this Court shall be digitally released to the complainant along with accrued interest, on furnishing the required documents. Sd/- (K.S.MUDAGAL) JUDGE Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE CS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36