- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8618 WP No. 3581 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3581 OF 2025 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN: 1. SMT PUTTAMMA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, S/O LATE S M MUDDAPPA, R/AT SHINGIHALLI VILLAGE, VEMGAL HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT. 2. SMT RAJAMMA W/O LATE S M VIJAYKUMAR AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT SHINGIHALLI VILLAGE, VEMGAL HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT. 3. SMT SHASHIKALA D S W/O S M NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT SHINGIHALLI VILLAGE, VEMGAL HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT. 4. SRI S M MANJUNATHA S/O MUDDAPPA S.M., AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT SHINGIHALLI VILLAGE, VEMGAL HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT. 5. SRI S M BASAVARAJU S/O MUDDAPPA S.M., Digitally signed by ROOPA R U Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8618 WP No. 3581 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT SHINGIHALLI VILLAGE, VEMGAL HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT. 6. SMT S M MUDDAMMA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, W/O SHIVALINGAMURTHY R/AT NO. 961, 5TH MAIN, 7TH CROSS, GOKULA EXTENSION, YESHWANTHPURA, BENGALURU - 560 022. 7. SMT S M VISHALAKSHI AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, W/O BASAVAMARI, R/AT 201, VIDHYANAGAR, 1ST CROSS, ABT BUILDING, HOSUR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 099. 8. SRI VINOD S/O LATE S M VIJAYKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/AT SHINGIHALLI VILLAGE, VEMGAL HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT. 9. SMT BHAVANI D/O LATE S M VIJAYKUAMR, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT SHINGIHALLI VILLAGE, VEMGAL HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT. …PETITIONERS (BY SMT. LATHA S S.,ADVOCATE) AND: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8618 WP No. 3581 of 2025 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER, NO. 14/3, II FLOOR, R P BUILDING, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001. 3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD I FLOOR, R P BUILDING, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R1; SRI. H.L. PRADEEP KUMAR.,ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE GENERAL AWARD DATED 12.07.2017 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN NO KIADB.LAQ. 2017-18 WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D TO THE WRIT PETITION IN SO FAR PETITIONERS LAND BEARING SY.NO.54, MEASURING 0-31½ PERCENT GUNTAS, SITUATED AT SHINGIHALLI VILLAGE, VEMAGAL HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK, IS CONCERNED AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:8618 WP No. 3581 of 2025 ORAL ORDER Petitioner Nos.2 to 10 who were the claimant in L.A.C No.16/2020, which was initiated at the instance of respondent- KIADB under Sections 30 and 31(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 are before this Court seeking quash of the general award dated 12.07.2017 and for the directions to the respondent- KIADB to consider the case of the petitioner under Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966. 2. The land in Sy.No.54, measuring 0.31 and 1/2 guntas situated at Shingihalli Village, Vemagal Hobli, Kolar Taluk purportedly belonging to the petitioners was acquired by the respondent-KIADB for the purpose of formation of industrial layout. It appears there was a dispute with regard to disbursement of the compensation which had resulted in matter being referred under Sections 30 and 31(2) of the Land Acquisition Act in L.A.C.No.16/2020, wherein the following order has been passed: '' Claimant No.2 to 10 including legal heirs of claimant no.4 are entitled to get awarded compensation amount of Rs.2,61,384/- (Two Lakhs Sixty-One Thousand Three Hundred Eighty-Four - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:8618 WP No. 3581 of 2025 Only). At the same time they are directed to execute the indemnity bond with one surety with condition that they are ready to re-deposit the amount received by them whenever directed by the Court or any other Courts, if found in any case rival claimants are thereto, accordingly petition is hereby disposed of. '' It is based on the aforesaid order, petitioners are before this Court. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent-KIADB submits that the respondent-KIADB was constrained to pass the general award in view of the dispute. Now that the said dispute seem to have been resolved, in terms of the order referred to above. Learned counsel for the respondent-KIADB submits that the request of the petitioner under Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act would be considered. 4. Submission taken on record. 5. Accordingly, following: ORDER (i). Writ petition is allowed in part. (ii). Impugned General Award dated 12.07.2017 produced at Annexure-D passed - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:8618 WP No. 3581 of 2025 by the respondent-KIADB insofar as the property of the petitioners herein is concerned, is hereby quashed. (iii). Respondent-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 petitioners satisfying all the requirement thereof. Needless to state that in the event of any dispute, the general award would stand restored. (iv). Respondent-KIADB is directed to withdraw the amount in deposit before the Competent Court, if any, and disburse to the petitioners herein, in terms of the observation made above, in accordance with law. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18