- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10092 WP No. 30331 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 30331 OF 2024 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. MAHADEVAIAH, S/O. LATE GANESHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, 2. SMT ANNAMMA W/O LATE BASAVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, 3. B ARUN S/O LATE BASAYARAJ, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, 4. AMMANNAMMA, D/O. LATE GANESHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT CHEELURU VILLAGE AND POST, MARALAVADI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-62 112. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. THIMMAIAH K H, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU -560-001. Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10092 WP No. 30331 of 2024 REP BY ITS SECRETARY 2. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, EAST WING, KANIJA BHAVAN, BENGALURU - 560 001. 3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, NO.39, 4TH FLOOR, SHANTHI GRUHA, BHARATH SCOUT AND GUIDE BUILDING, PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SPOORTHY HEGDE N, HCGP FOR R1 SRI. ASHWIN G. RAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO THE GENERAL AWARD BEARING NO. CI431SPQ2006 DATED 25.10.2006 CI307SPQ2009 DATED 02.02.2010 PASSED BY THE R-3 AT ANNEXURE-A AND THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE R-3 VIDE LETTER NO. KIADB /LAQ/734/2024-25 DTD 8.07.2024 AT ANNEXURE-B. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10092 WP No. 30331 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER The petitioners are aggrieved of the impugned endorsement at Annexure-B issued by the 3rd respondent - Special Land Acquisition Officer, who has declined to accede to the claim of the petitioners, who are the owners of 1 acre 12 guntas of land in Sy.No.127 of Cheeluru Village, Maralavadi Hobli, Kanakapura Taluk, Ramanagara District, for allotment of developed land in lieu of compensation or to pay compensation in terms of Section 29(2) of the KIADB Act. 2. Learned counsel submits that the only ground on which the 3rd respondent has declined to accede to the request made by the petitioners is that the 3rd respondent has passed a general award and has deposited the compensation amount of Rs.12,56,388/- before the learned I Addl. District and Session Judge, Ramanagara. Learned counsel however submits that this Court has the power to direct the 3rd respondent to accede to the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10092 WP No. 30331 of 2024 request made by the petitioners. Learned counsel has pointed to various such orders passed by this Court including the case in W.P.No.15877/2024 dated 28.06.2024. 3. This Court finds that in umpteen number of cases, this Court has permitted the land losers to claim compensation as per the consent award upon establishing the fact that they are the owners of the property. There is no reason why similar order should not be passed in the instant case also. 4. Hence, the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned general award at Annexure-N to the writ petition insofar as the land of the petitioners, which is the subject matter of the instant writ petition, is set aside. (iii) The respondent/Special Land Acquisition Officer of the KIADB is directed to reconsider the request of the petitioners for award of compensation by way of an agreement under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:10092 WP No. 30331 of 2024 and pass necessary orders within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. (iv) The respondent/Special Land Acquisition Officer, KIADB, is at liberty to withdraw the amount that has been deposited by it pursuant to the general award before the jurisdictional Court. (v) It is needless to state that, in the event the petitioners failing to provide necessary documents to establish their ownership over the land concerned, the general award would stand restored. (vi) In the alternative, the 3rd respondent shall also consider the grant of developed land in terms of the Government Order dated bearing No.CA 103 SPQ(E) 2019 dated 23.02.2021, if the petitioners are eligible for the same. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE KLY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 66