Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 85930 (KAR)

KALLU ANANT NAYAK SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/101945/2023 · 2025-12-09

M Nagaprasanna

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17712 WP No. 101945 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 101945 OF 2023 (LA-RES) BETWEEN: 1. KALLU ANANT NAYAK SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS., SHRI. ANANT S/O. LATE KALLU NAYAK, AGE. 74 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. BELEKERI VILLAGE, ANKOLA-581321, TQ. ANKOLA, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA. 2. SHRI. VIJAY S/O. LATE KALLU NAYAK, AGE. 63 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. BELEKERI VILLAGE, ANKOLA-581321, TQ. ANKOLA, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA. 3. SHRI. GOPAL S/O. LATE KALLU NAYAK, AGE. 62 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. BELEKERI VILLAGE, ANKOLA-581321, TQ. ANKOLA, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA. 4. SHRI. VENKATARAMANA S/O. LATE KALLU NAYAK AGE. 71 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. BELEKERI VILLAGE, ANKOLA-581321, TQ. ANKOLA, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRUTHVI K. S., ADVOCATE) RAKESH S HARIHAR Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Date: 2025.12.11 16:39:14 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17712 WP No. 101945 of 2023 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, R/BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY DEPT. OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KARWAR-581336, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA. 3. THE TAHASILDAR, ANKOLA-581314, TQ. ANKOLA, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA. 4. THE SPECIAL OFFICER, SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, SEA BIRD PROJECT NO.2, KARWAR-581 301, TQ. KARWAR, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.4 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 21/11/2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-J AND TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER TO DECLARE TO ISSUE THE COMPENSATION OR TO WITHDRAW THE LAND IN QUESTION FROM THE ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS IN RESPECT OF LAND BRG SVY NO.10A1A1A/9 MEASURING TO AN EXTENT OF 1 ACRE 20 GUNTAS SITUATED AT HATTIKERI VILLAGE, TQ. ANKOLA, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING B GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17712 WP No. 101945 of 2023 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking the following prayer: a. “Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus by directing the Respondent no.4 to consider the Representation dtd. 21/11/2022 submitted by the Petitioner vide Annexure-J and to pass appropriate Order to declare to issue the Compensation or to withdraw the land in question from the acquisition proceedings in respect of Land brg Svy No.10a1a1a/9 measuring to an extent of 1 Acre 20 Guntas situated at Hattikeri village, Tq. Ankola, Dist. Uttara Kannada, in the interest of justice and equity. b. Issue such other suitable order/s or directions as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. It transpires that during the lifetime of the petitioners’ father, the family lands had been acquired pursuant to acquisition proceedings initiated in the year 1966. The father of the petitioners did not choose to question any of the proceedings, nor did he question the grant of compensation, inadequacy of compensation, or otherwise, before any forum. After nearly 50 years of the acquisition, the petitioners, being the legal representatives of the deceased, have now approached this Court seeking a direction in the nature of mandamus to grant - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17712 WP No. 101945 of 2023 compensation, contending that the compensation received by their father was inadequate. 3. Learned HCGP, on instructions and upon verification of records, submits that the petitioners’ father had received the entire compensation pursuant to the acquisition of the land in the year 1966. There is no warrant to grant any further or enhanced compensation to the petitioners, who are the legal representatives, for the same land that was acquired in 1966. 4. Finding no merit in the petition, the petition stands disposed of. 5. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE AC/CT-ASC List No.: 2 Sl No.: 9