- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29468 WP No. 22903 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 22903 OF 2024 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN: 1. SMT RATHNAMMA D/O LATE ANNAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 2. A MUNIRAJU S/O ANNAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 3. SMT. KAMALA D/O LATE ANNAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS 4. SMT. KOMALA D/O LATE ANNAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT GOTTIGERE BANNERGHATTA ROAD UTTARAHALLI BENGALURU. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ANANDA V., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29468 WP No. 22903 of 2024 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE (INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT) M S BUILDING BENGALURU 01 2. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO. 14/3, RASTROTHANA PARISHATH 2ND FLOOR, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BENGALURU 560 001 REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER 3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD (BMICP) 1ST FLOOR, MAHARSHI ARAVIND BHAVAN NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BENGALURU 560 001 4. M/S NANDI INFRA STRUCTURE CORRIDOR ENTERPRISES LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR NO.1, MIDFORD GARDEN OPPOSITE M.G.ROAD BENGALURU 560001 5. M/S. NANDI ECONOMIC CORRIDOR ENTERPRISES LTD., - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29468 WP No. 22903 of 2024 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR NO.1, MIDFORD GARDEN OPPOSITE M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU 560001. …RESPONDENTS (BY DR. RAVINDRA V. REDDY, SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR R1; SRI. P.V. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3; SRI. S.B. MATHAPATI, ADVOCATE FOR R4; SRI. R.V.S. NAIK, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. NITIN PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE RESPONDENT 2 AND 3 AS PER PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION BEARING NO. CI 196 SPQ 98 (PUBLISHED IN THE GAZATEE ON 03.06.1999) I.E., ANNEXURE-B AND THE FINAL NOTIFICATION NO. 196 SPQ 98 (P-II), DATED 05.07.2003 (PUBLISHED IN THE KARNATAKA GAZETTEE) I.E. ANNEXURE-C IN RELATING TO THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONERS COMPRISED IS SY.NO. 5/3, MEASURING 1 ACRE 14 GUNTAS OF PILLAGANAHALLI VILLAGE, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, AS HAVING LAPSED AND/OR ABANDONED ON ACCOUNT OF NON UTILIZATION OF THE LANDS BY THE KIADB FOR MORE THAN TWO DECADES AND BEING NULL AND VOID. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29468 WP No. 22903 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioners are before this Court, seeking the following prayer: "i. To issue a writ of certiorari to quash the acquisition proceedings initiatd by the respondents 2 & 3 as per preliminary notification bearing No. CI 196 SPQ 98 (published in the Gazatee on 03.06.1999) i.e., Annexure-B and the final notification No. 196 SPQ 98 (P-II), dated 05.07.2003 (published in the Karnataka Gazettee) i.e., Annexure-C in relating to the property of the petitioners comprised in Sy.No.5/3, measuring 1 acre 14 guntas of Pillaganahalli Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, as having lapsed and/or abandoned on account of non utilization of the lands by the KIADB for more than two decades and being null and void; ii. To award costs and grant such other relief(s) as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and expedient in he circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity." 2. Heard Sri. Ananda V., learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Dr. Ravindra V. Reddy, learned Special counsel for respondent No.1, Sri. P.V. Chandrashekar, learned counsel - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29468 WP No. 22903 of 2024 appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3, Sri. S.B. Mathapati, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4, Sri. R.V.S. Naik, learned Senior counsel appearing for respondent No.5 and have perused the material on record. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that as on the date the matter was being heard and reserved, the petitioners had not impleaded the Nandi Infrastructure Corridor as a party respondent. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had directed that the NICE be impleaded as a party respondent in this proceeding as well, as it was a party respondent in all the proceedings considered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Therefore, the subject matter was de-linked. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.50634/2014 and connected matters in terms of its order dated 04.07.2025 has disposed batch of petitions by the following order: "These batch of writ petitions have been filed by the landowners of various extents of lands, which were notified for acquisition by the respondent-State of Karnataka for the benefit of the respondent-Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprises Limited (NICE), for the formation of a mega project known as ‘Nandi Infrastructure Corridor’, where expressway of 111 kms., - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29468 WP No. 22903 of 2024 including interchanges, Toll plaza (4528 Acres); Peripheral road 41 kms., (2193 Acres) and Link road measuring 9.8 kms., (278 Acres) were proposed to be formed and constructed. The prayers in all these writ petitions are to quash the acquisition proceedings on the ground that no awards have been passed till date, although the acquisition notification under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short) were issued during the years commencing from 1998 to 2009 and final notifications under Section 28(4) of the Act, were issued from the year 2003 to 2009. Therefore, all these writ petitions are heard together and disposed of by this common order. 2. The learned Counsels appearing for the petitioners, led by learned Senior Counsel Sri.H.N.Shashidhara have prefaced their arguments on the basis of a judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.6763/2017 dated 08.06.2023 in the case of The Special Land Acquisition Officer, KIADB Vs. Smt. M.Shakunthalamma and Others. 3. It has been pointed that the Hon’ble Division Bench rejected the contentions of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) that the learned Single Judge has grossly erred in directing the KIADB to pay compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and noticed the fact that in another case i.e., W.A.No.557/2021 dated 23.03.2022 in the case of Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board, Represented by its Chief Executive Officer and Another Vs. K.H.Shivanna And Others, it had held that 9 years delay in passing the award is fatal to the proceedings and had quashed the proceedings initiated for the acquisition of lands. The said order was challenged by the KIADB in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.22081/2022 and the Hon’ble Supreme Court by order dated 02.12.2022 dismissed the said Special Leave Petition. It was noticed that 11 years had elapsed and no award was passed and therefore, the acquisition notifications of the year 2008 and 2009 were required to be quashed. It was pointed out that the said acquisitions were also for the benefit of the respondent- - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29468 WP No. 22903 of 2024 NICE. However, the Hon’ble Division Bench proceeded to quash the notifications dated 16.08.2008 and 21.03.2009, on the ground that more than 11 years had elapsed and no award was passed. The said judgment of the Division Bench has been confirmed at the hands of the Apex Court in SLP Dairy No.3767/2024 dated 01.04.2024. The Apex Court has held that in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of cases where there was delay of 11 years in passing the award and therefore, it is not inclined to interfere with the orders passed by the Division Bench of this Court. 4. Learned Senior Counsels Sri.D.L.N.Rao and Sri.R.V.S.Naik, appearing for respondent-NICE and learned Senior Counsel Sri.Prabhuling K. Navadgi, appearing for impleading applicants/subsequent purchasers, have contended that the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has confirmed the earlier judgments of the Division Bench of this Court and upheld the acquisition proceedings in Civil Appeal Nos.3492-3494/2005 and connected matters on 20.04.2006. It is contended that the Bangalore-Mysore Infrastructure Corridor Project (BMICP) has been implemented in accordance with the directions issued by the Apex Court. Once again, the Hon’ble Apex Court, in Special Leave Petition No.2691/2010 and later in Civil Appeal No.1215/2011 upheld the acquisition proceedings and dismissed the Civil Appeal imposing costs of Rs.10 Lakhs on one of the petitioners herein viz., Sri.M.Nagabhushana (W.P.No.13956/2022) and the said judgment is reported in (2011) 3 SCC 408. It was therefore contended that the prayer made in the writ petitions cannot be granted. 5. To this, learned Senior Counsel Sri.H.N.Shashidhara appearing for the petitioners submitted that the Apex Court in Anil Kumar Gupta Vs. State of Bihar & Others, (2012) 12 SCC 443 has held that multiple causes of action may arise during the acquisition proceedings. At each stage, a fresh cause of action may arise and therefore, it cannot be contended that a landowner who has suffered an order of dismissal in the earlier round of litigations is precluded from filing subsequent writ petitions. The learned Senior Counsel would therefore submit that having regard to the judgment rendered by the Division Bench in the case of Smt.M.Shakunthalamma (supra), which is based on a - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29468 WP No. 22903 of 2024 new cause of action viz., inordinate delay in passing award in acquisition proceedings, which is detrimental to the interest of the landowners, these writ petitions have been filed. 6. It is also contended by the learned Senior Counsel Sri.Prabhuling K. Navadgi, that some of the writ petitions are filed by subsequent purchasers and therefore, such writ petitions filed at the hands of the subsequent purchasers are not maintainable. 7. Heard the learned Senior Counsels Sri.H.N.Shashidhara, Sri.D.R.Ravishankar, Sri.Sriranga and learned Counsels Sri.B.Ramesh, Sri.T.N.Vishwanatha, Sri.S.A.Sridhara Murthy, Sri.K.K. Vasanth, Sri.Srikanth S., Sri.A.V.Srihari, Sri.Raghavendra Kattimani M., Sri.R.Raviprakash, Sri.Vamshi Krishna C., Sri.Krishna B.R., Sri.Clifton D.Rozario, Sri.Kalyan R., Sri.K.K.Vasanth, Sri.Bhadrinath R., for the petitioners, learned Senior Counsels Sri.D.L.N Rao, Sri.R.V.S.Naik, Prof.Ravivarma Kumar, Sri.S.A.Ahmed, learned Additional Advocate General, Sri.Mallaharao K., learned Additional Advocate General, Sri.Siddarth Babu Rao, Sri.Ravindra V Reddy, Special Counsels, and learned Counsels Sri.P.V.Chandrashekar, Sri.Murugesh V.Charati, Sri.B.B.Patil, Sri.Nitin Prasad, Sri.K.Krishna, Sri.Yogesh D Naik and Sri.Ashok N Nayak, appearing for the respondent-NICE, NECE, KIADB, BDA, BMICPA and perused the petition papers. 8. As rightly submitted by learned Senior Counsel Sri.H.N.Shashidhara and having regard to the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Anil Kumar Gupta (supra), the writ petitions are maintainable, although earlier writ petitions filed by some of the petitioners herein have been dismissed at the hands of this Court and at the hands of the Hon’ble Apex Court. The grounds raised in these writ petitions are that despite the preliminary notifications of acquisition under Section 28(1) of the Act, 1966 being issued during the years 1998 to 2009 and the final notifications under Section 28(4) of the Act, being issued in the years 2003 to 2009, the respondent-State and the Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) have failed to pass an award till date. In fact, it has to be noticed that the respondent-Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprises Limited/Nandi Economic Corridor Enterprises Limited, have filed two - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29468 WP No. 22903 of 2024 writ petitions before this Court seeking a writ of mandamus/direction to the respondent-State and the SLAO to pass awards. That being the position, having regard to the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Smt.M.Shakunthalamma (supra), setting aside the acquisition proceedings on the ground that no award was passed even after lapse of 11 years and the said judgment being upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Court is required to follow the same. 9. More than 23 years have passed since the notifications for acquisition were issued during the years from 1998 to 2009 and awards have not been passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. Having regard to the plight of the landowners who are deprived of the use and occupation of agricultural lands and they losing their livelihood, this Court has no other option, than to follow the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Division Bench. 10. During the course of the proceedings it was submitted at the hands of the learned counsels for the petitioners that the lands in question are not part of the Bangalore-Mysore Infrastructure Corridor Project (BMICP) and no part of the lands in question have been utilized by the respondents for formation of expressway, interchanges, toll plaza, peripheral road or link road. The said submission has not been controverted at the hands of the learned counsels for the respondents. 11. Insofar as the contentions raised by the learned Senior Counsel Sri.Prabhuling K.Navadgi, that subsequent purchasers have filed some of these writ petitions, although it is true that writ petitions are not maintainable at the hands of subsequent purchasers raising a challenge to the acquisition proceedings, nevertheless, having regard to the enormity of the extent of the lands notified for acquisition and a large majority of the writ petitions filed at the hands of the landowners are being allowed, dismissing the other writ petitions may not be warranted. The benefit of such declaration and quashment of the acquisition notifications will nevertheless enure to the benefit of the landowners only. 12. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following: - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29468 WP No. 22903 of 2024 ORDER (i) The writ petitions are allowed. (ii) The impugned preliminary notifications dated 27.10.1998, 09.12.1998, 19.12.1998, 02.06.1999, 03.06.1999, 29.01.2003 and 21.03.2009 issued under Section 28(1) of the Act, and final notifications dated 18.02.2003, 12.03.2003, 08.04.2003, 08.05.2003, 21.05.2003, 24.06.2003, 05.07.2003, 07.07.2003, *30.03.2004 21.03.2009 and 02.06.2009 issued under Section 28(4) of the Act, insofar as they pertain to the respective writ petitioners/ landowners are concerned, are hereby quashed. 13. Pending Interlocutory Application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of." 4. Learned Senior counsel appearing for respondent No.5 would submit that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has not considered the settled principle of law in plethora of cases and has quashed the Notification on the score that award is passed for more than 23 years. 5. Learned Senior counsel would urge this Court to take a different view contending that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has not considered plethora of judgements of the Apex Court on the issue. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29468 WP No. 22903 of 2024 6. The submission so made is noted only to be rejected for the reason that the subject petition is similar on all its fours to what was decided by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court supra, there being no difference, this Court would not breach judicial discipline, by acceding to the submission of the learned Senior counsel for respondent No.5 to take a different view. 7. In the light of the issue covered on all its fours, I deem it appropriate to follow suit, and grant the same relief that the companion petitions have been granted by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court supra. 8. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned preliminary notification bearing No. CI 196 SPQ 98 (published in the Gazette on 03.06.1999) and final notification bearing - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29468 WP No. 22903 of 2024 No. 196 SPQ 98 (P-II) dated 05.07.2003 insofar as it pertains to the respective writ petitioners/ landowners are concerned, are hereby quashed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE SJK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25