- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18658 WP No. 103474 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO.103474 OF 2023 (LA-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. GADIGEYYA S/O. LALATAYYA KALMATH, AGE. 67 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. MATAPATHI ONI, POST. AGADI, TQ. AND DIST. HAVERI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. N.P. VIVEKMEHTA, ADVOCATE & SRI. B.M. ANGADI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY, M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HAVERI, HAVERI-581110. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, UPPER TUNGA PROJECT SUB-DIVISION, RANEBENNUR-581115.. 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, UPPER TUNGA PROJECT SUB-DIVISION, HAVERI, D.C. OFFICE ROAD, HAVERI-581110. Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18658 WP No. 103474 of 2023 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KARNATAKA NEERAVARI NIGAM LIMITED, UPPER TUNGA PROJECT DIVISION, RANEBENNUR-581115. 6. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, UPPER TUNGA PROJECT, MAGOD ROAD, RANEBENNUR-581115. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, AGA FOR R1-R4 & R6; SRI. SHIVARAJ C. BELLAKKI, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH ANNEXURE-F ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.3, 4 AND 5; ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO THE RESPONDENTS TO LAY DOWN CHANNEL AS PER ANNEXURE- E; ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO RESPONDENT NO.2 CONSIDER REPRESENTATION VIDE ANNEXURE-J DATED 19-01- 2022; CALL FOR THE RECORDS; ISSUE ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION THE HONORABLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE CASE AND INCLUDING COST IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY; ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASH THE NOTIFICATION NO.LAQ/UTP/Vahi:153/2014-15 DATED 18/03/2015 VIDE ANNEXURE-R2 AS VAGUE AND IMPROPER. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18658 WP No. 103474 of 2023 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) This petition is filed assailing the sketch marked at Annexure-E prepared by respondent No.4, Upper Tunga Project and the sketch marked at Annexure-F, prepared by the Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Limited. 2. A writ of mandamus is also sought directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 19.01.2022 marked at Annexure-J. 3. By way of an amendment, the petitioner has prayed to quash the notification dated 18.03.2015. The said notification dated 18.03.2015 is the preliminary notification under Section 11(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement (RFCTLARR) Act, 20131. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, when the notification was issued under Section 11(1) of Act of 2013, the respondent/acquiring authority had not specified the 1 For short, ‘Act of 2013’ - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18658 WP No. 103474 of 2023 extent of the land proposed to be acquired from the petitioner's land bearing Sy.No.226/1. 5. It is urged that the petitioner was not served with a copy of the notification and that only after the filing of the writ petition, the petitioner come to know about the notification issued in the year 2015. Consequently, an application was filed seeking amendment of the petition to challenge the notification dated 18.03.2015. 6. It is further submitted that even if a final notification has been issued, the same is liable to be ignored, as the preliminary notification dated 18.03.2015 itself is not in accordance with law. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would refer to the judgment of the Apex Court in Competent Authority Vs. Barangore Jute Factory and Others2, and contend that a preliminary notification issued without adhering to the applicable law is not sustainable. 2 (2005) 13 SCC 477 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18658 WP No. 103474 of 2023 8. In addition, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would also urge that Annexure-F the sketch prepared by the Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Limited, and Annexure-E the sketch prepared by the Upper Tunga Project, are not tallying with each other. 9. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents would urge that the writ petition is filed in the year 2023 and challenge to the preliminary notification of the year 2015, is unsustainable at this point of time. 10. It is also urged that the preliminary notification was issued for six survey numbers, namely 226/1, 226/2, 226/3, Sy.No.225/1A, 225/1B and 225/2 of Agadi village, Taluk Haveri. 11. In the aforementioned three properties namely 226/1, 226/2, 226/3, 01 acre 01 gunta was sought to be acquired and in Sy.No.225/2 which belongs to the petitioner, in terms of final notification, 02 guntas were sought to be acquired. 12. Out of 1 acre 1 gunta sought to be acquired out of three survey numbers namely 226/1, 226/2, 226/3 in - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18658 WP No. 103474 of 2023 Sy.No.226/1 only 18 guntas were acquired as specified in final notification. 13. It is submitted that in the petition, there is no grievance raised in respect of Sy.No.225/2. 14. Learned counsel for the respondents would urge that as the final notification is not under challenge, the petitioner is not entitled to the relief. 15. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that compensation is received in respect of Survey No.225/2. 16. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that no compensation is received by the petitioner. 17. Though in the judgment of the Apex Court supra, it is stated that in case if the preliminary notification is defective, subsequent proceedings would be invalid, it is to be noticed the said judgment is rendered in a different factual context. 18. The Court is of the view that, in the instant case, the omission pointed out in the preliminary notification is not serious - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18658 WP No. 103474 of 2023 omission to render the final notification invalid when there is no challenge to the final notification. 19. The defect if any in the preliminary notification, to mention the exact extent of land in each of the survey numbers acquired is cured by specifying the exact extent of land sought to be acquired in each of the survey numbers. 20. In terms of the final notification, only 18 guntas in Sy.No.226/1 and only 2 guntas in Sy.No.225/2 are sought to be acquired. It is not the case of the petitioner that under the preliminary notification lesser land was sought to be acquired. 21. Under these circumstances, the Court is of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to the relief to quash the preliminary notification of the year 2015 when the challenge is laid in the year 2023. 22. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also raised a contention that there is variation in the two sketches marked at Annexures-D and F. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18658 WP No. 103474 of 2023 23. Learned counsel for the respondents on instruction would submit that the pipeline would be laid down as per Annexure-R1 i.e, map prepared by Karnataka Neeravari Nigama. Under these circumstances, the petition to challenge the sketch is also not maintainable. 24. However, this Court has to clarify that the respondents cannot use an inch of land in excess of 18-guntas shown as per Annexure-R1. 25. In case any land in excess of what is shown in Annexure-R1 is sought to be used the petitioner is entitled to avail such remedy as available in law. 26. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that once a preliminary notification is issued under Section 11(1), the landowner cannot carryout any development in respect of the notified property. There is no quarrel with regard to the said proposition. However, it is not the case of the petitioner that because of ambiguity in the notification issued in the year 2015, the petitioner is prevented from developing his properties. Thus, the said contention does not come to the aid of the petitioner. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18658 WP No. 103474 of 2023 27. With above observations, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE Para Nos.1 to 8-PMP Para Nos.9 to end-AM CT-MCK LIST NO.: 38 SL NO.: 2