- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39044-DB WA No. 852 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI WRIT APPEAL NO. 852 OF 2025 (LA-KHB) BETWEEN: 1. SRI KRISHNEGOWDA SINCE DEAD BY LRS SRI SIDDARAMEGOWDA S/O LATE KRISHNEGOWDA AGE ABOUT 72 YEARS AGRICULTURIST R/AT YELACHALLI VILLAGE YELAWALA HOBLI MYSORE TALUK AND DISTRICT - 570 005 …APPELLANT (BY SRI Y.K. NARAYANA SHARMA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001 2. THE KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD BY ITS COMMISSIONER CAUVERY BHAVAN BENGALURU - 560 009 Digitally signed by AMBIKA H B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39044-DB WA No. 852 of 2025 3. KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER CAUVERY BHAVAN BENGALURU - 560 009 …RESPONDENTS (SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH, AGA FOR RESPONDENT No.1) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING THAT ORDERS BE PASSED AND THE ORDER DATED 16.04.2025 IN W.P. No.4181/2016, IN SO FAR AS THE PORTION OF THE ORDER THAT "IF THE PETITIONER IS IN UNAUTHORIZED OCCUPATION OF ANY EXTENT OF LAND BARRING 3 ACRES 30 GUNTAS OF LAND IN SY.No.99/9DN THE RESPONDENT KHB IS FREE TO PROCEED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND EVICT THE PETITIONER AND TAKE POSSESSION OF THE SAME", BE SET ASIDE THE SAID WRIT PETITION BE ALLOWED WITH THE COSTS AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. The appellant has filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 16.04.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.4181/2016 (LA-KHB) captioned, 'Sri Krishne Gouda v. The State of Karnataka and others'. The appellant had filed the said writ petition impugning an award notice dated 30.11.2015. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39044-DB WA No. 852 of 2025 2. It is the appellant’s case that after the Notification under Section 6(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was quashed, the impugned award notice dated 30.11.2015 was issued and is thus liable to be quashed. The learned Single Judge had concurred with the appellant and, accordingly, allowed the writ petition and quashed the impugned award notice dated 30.11.2015, which was assailed in the said writ petition. However, the learned Single Judge had also made the following observations: "However, it is made clear that if the petitioner is an unauthorized occupation of any extent of land barring 3 acres 30 guntas of land in Sy. No.99/DN, the respondent-KHB is free to proceed in accordance with law and evict the petitioner and take possession of the same." 3. The appellant's grievance arises from the said observations. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the land excluding 3 Acres and 30 Guntas falling in Survey No.99/9DN – which is alleged to be in unauthorised occupation of the appellant – was not a subject matter of the writ petition. He submits that based on the observations made in the impugned order, the concerned authorities have initiated action for evicting the appellant - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39044-DB WA No. 852 of 2025 from the properties, which are alleged to be in his unauthorised occupation. 4. It is noted that the learned Single Judge has not returned any finding in regard to the appellant's unauthorised occupation. The learned Single Judge has noted the contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the respondent to the effect that the appellant is in unauthorised occupation of Block 56A in Survey No.99 of Yellachalli Village, Yelawale Hobli, Mysore Taluk, Mysore District. In the aforesaid context, the learned Single Judge had clarified that if the appellant was in unauthorised occupation of the land, respondent, Karnataka Housing Board [KHB], would be free to proceed in accordance with law and evict the appellant and take possession of the same. 5. Clearly, the said observations cannot be read to mean that the KHB has been directed to take any action. The import of the said observation is that the impugned order should not be read as precluding the KHB from taking such action as it is otherwise entitled to in accordance with law. If the appellant claims any right - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39044-DB WA No. 852 of 2025 or has any objection to the same, the same is required to be considered as well. 6. The appeal is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (J.M.KHAZI) JUDGE AHB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26