- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52996-DB WA No. 1023 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU WRIT APPEAL NO. 1023 OF 2024 (LA-BDA) BETWEEN: 1. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BY ITS COMMISSIONER KUMARA PARK WEST T CHOWDAIAH ROAD BANGALORE - 560 020. 2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA PARK WEST T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD BANGALORE - 560 020. APPELLANTS 1 AND 2 ARE OF SAME AUTHORITY AND BOTH ARE REPRESENTED BY ADDL., LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BDA. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K. KRISHNA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. K. NARASIMHAMURTHY S/O LATE G KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52996-DB WA No. 1023 of 2024 R/AT NO.35/2, 38TH A CROSS 2ND MAIN, JAYANAGARA 8TH BLOCK, BANGALORE - 560 082. 2. K JAYARAM S/O LATE G. KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS R/AT VILLA NO.C/61 SKYLARK ARCADIA SADARAMANGALA ROAD SHAKTI LAYOUT, KODIGEHALLI BANGALORE - 560 067. 3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VIKASA SOUDHA AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIKRAM HUILGOL, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ROHAN HOSMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2; SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R3) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE PASSED IN W.P. NO.10462/2021 DATED 08-04-2024 AND DISMISS THE WRIT PETITION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52996-DB WA No. 1023 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) 1. The present writ appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 08.04.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P No.10462/2021 filed by the respondents No.1 and 2. 2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking in the writ petition. 3. The petitioners are the owners of land measuring 1 acre 11 guntas in Survey No.49 of Benniganahalli Village. The said land was allowed to be used for industrial purposes way back in the year 1964. The father of the petitioners purchased the said land on 18.05.1972 and he applied for approval of construction of factory building from the erstwhile CITB. The CITB by its Board Resolution No. 473 dated 02.08.1972 approved the development plan and the father of the petitioners started a small scale industry from the said premises. 4. A preliminary notification under Section 17(1) of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BDA Act’), was issued on 28.05.1984 for - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52996-DB WA No. 1023 of 2024 the purpose of forming a layout called “East of NGEF”. The preliminary notification would also include the land bearing Survey No.49. The final notification came to be issued on 23.10.1986 under Section 19 of the BDA Act. Therefore, the petitioners filed the Writ Petition No.11888/2020 with following prayers: "(i) Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Resp.No.1 & 2 to complete the acquisition process of the Petitioner's land measuring 1 acre 11 gts in Sy.No.49 of Benniganahalli Village, K.R. Puram Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk by directing them to pass the Award under The Right to Fair Compensation & Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation & Resettlement Act, 2013 within a period of 2 months; - Or in the alternative - (ii) Issue a Writ of Certiorari quashing the Preliminary Notification bearing HUD 238 MNX 79 dated 28.5.1984 and the Final notification bearing HUD 368 MNX 86, dated 23.10.1986 in so far as the Petitioners' land measuring 1 acre 11 gts in Sy.No.49 of Benniganahalli village, K.R.Puram Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk is concerned; copies at - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52996-DB WA No. 1023 of 2024 Annexures-D & E respectively - issued by respondent No.1. - consequently - (iii) Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Resp.No.3 to delete the name "BDA" from the RTC & other revenue records pertaining to Sy.No.49 of Benniganahally village, K.R. Puram Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk; copy at Annexure-"N". (iv) Pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity." 5. Thus, the alternate prayers were made for dropping the acquisition proceedings on the ground of laches and delay or paying the compensation under the new Land Acquisition Act, 2013, as amended. The appellants herein assured the Court that they would address the grievance of the petitioners and take necessary action on their representations regarding dropping of the land acquisition proceedings. No award was passed in all these years till filing of the petition and even the date of order passed by the learned Single Judge on 30.11.2020. Once the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52996-DB WA No. 1023 of 2024 learned Single Judge disposed of the W.P No.11888/2020 on the undertaking of the BDA that they would consider the request of the petitioners for dropping the land acquisition proceedings in respect of their lands, the BDA went back and passed the award after 37 years from the date of the final notification. 6. The petitioners, therefore, felt cheated and they came to this Court in the Writ Petition No.10462/2021. The learned Single Judge having noted the aforesaid facts has passed the impugned judgment and order and quashed the land acquisition proceedings in respect of the petitioners land on the ground that the award has not been passed for a period of 37 years and only after the challenge was made to the acquisition proceedings, to negate the claim of the petitioners, the award came to be passed after the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 30.11.2020 came to be passed in W.P No.11888/2020. 7. We also put it to the learned counsel for the BDA that whether the BDA is willing to pay the compensation to the petitioners as of the present market rate if they require - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52996-DB WA No. 1023 of 2024 the land of the petitioners for the development. The learned counsel for the BDA submits that they are not in a position to pay the compensation at the present market rate. 8. Considering the aforesaid facts and taking into consideration that no award was passed for 37 years in respect of the land of the petitioners, the learned Single Judge has taken the correct view that the acquisition proceedings got lapsed in respect of the land of the petitioners. We find no error in the impugned judgment and order and therefore, we dismiss this appeal. No order as to costs. (D K SINGH) JUDGE (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE UN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22 Digitally signed by DINESH KUMAR SINGH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA Digitally signed by TARA VITASTA GANJU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA