- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27599 WP No. 1707 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 1707 OF 2024 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN: 1. SRI B.SARDAR SINGH S/O BHAGAVANA SINGH, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/A BAVANAHALLI, KOLAR DISTRICT, KARNATAKA - 563 130. 2. SRI B.D.RAMACHANDRA SINGH S/O B.DEVI SINGH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/A BAVANAHALLI, MALUR SUB-DISTRICT, KOLAR DISTRICT, KARNATAKA - 563 130. 3. SMT.S.G.LAKSHMIBAI W/O B.D.UDAY BHAN SINGH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/A BAVANAHALLI VILLAGE, BAVANAHALLI POST, MALUR TALUK, KASABA HOBLI, BAVANAHALLI, KOLAR DISTRICT, KARNATAKA - 563 130. 4. SMT. B.D.BHUVANESHWARI DEVI D/O DEVI SINGH, Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27599 WP No. 1707 of 2024 AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/A BAVANAHALLI, MALUR, KOLAR KARNATAKA - 563 130. 5. SRI INDER SINGH K., C/O D.I. KRISHNA SINGH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/A NO. 2330, 8TH CROSS, CHANDRANAGAR KSL L/O BANGALORE SOUTH, BENGALURU - 560 078. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI SHIVAPRASAD SHANTANAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. KARNATAKA INDUISTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO. 14/3, 2ND FLOOR, RASHTROTHANA PARISHATH BUILDING, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27599 WP No. 1707 of 2024 3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISTION OFFICER-1 KIADB, NO. 39, BHARATHIYA SCOUTS AND GUIDES BUILDING, SHANTHI GRUHA, 4TH FLOOR, ARAMANE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE, HCGP FOR R1; SRI B.B.PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3; SRI SIDDHARTHA H.M., ADVOCATE FOR IMPLEADING APPLICANTS) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO PAY COMPENSATION TO THE PETITIONERS AS PER LETTER DTD 16.09.2022 ISSUED BY THE R3 SLAO ANNEXURE-E BEARING NO. KIADB/LAQ/2015/2022-23 U/S 29(2) OF THE KIAD ACT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, 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: “a) ISSUE a writ in nature of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction, directing the Respondents to pay compensation to the Petitioners as per Letter dated 16.09.2022 issued by the Respondent no.3 SLAO (Annexure – E) bearing No.KIADB/LAQ/2015/2022- - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27599 WP No. 1707 of 2024 23 under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. Heard Sri Shivaprasad Shantanagoudar, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri Spoorthy Hegde N., learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1, Sri B.B.Patil, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 and Sri Siddhartha H.M., learned counsel for the impleading applicants. 3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows: On 20.06.1962, one Muniyappa sells the subject property in favour of one Devisingh in terms of a registered sale deed for a valid consideration. A suit is then instituted by Muniyappa in O.S.No.17/1963, which comes to be decreed in favour of Devisingh, who had purchased the property. After the death of Devisingh, his family members succeed to the property. On 02.06.2020, a final notification including the petitioners’ land is notified. Respondent No.3 – Special Land Acquisition Officer communicates to the petitioners under Section 29 (2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (‘the Act’ for short), with regard to the computation of the compensation and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27599 WP No. 1707 of 2024 sought certain documents with regard to the land for the purpose of disbursement of the compensation. Accordingly, Tahsildhar submits a report to the Special Land Acquisition Officer detailing the flow of title of the subject property and notes that the petitioners are in possession of the said property. Despite all this, the case of the petitioners is that, no compensation is paid for acquiring their lands. 4. Learned counsel for petitioners would take this Court through the documents appended to the petition to demonstrate that despite the finding that the lands of the petitioners are acquired, no compensation is paid till date. He would buttress his submission by contending that there cannot be any delay to pay compensation to the land loser. He would seek to place reliance upon the judgment in the case of K.T.PLANTATION (P) LTD., v. STATE OF KARNATAKA reported in (2011) 9 SCC 1, has held as follows: "…. …. …. (e) Public purpose is a precondition for deprivation of a person from his property under Article 300-A and the right to claim compensation is also inbuilt in that article and when a person is deprived of his property the State has to justify both the grounds which may depend on scheme of the statute, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27599 WP No. 1707 of 2024 legislative policy, object and purpose of the legislature and other related factors." It is also the submission of the learned counsel that the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board has disbursed compensation to the land loser and the petitioners are similarly situated. To substantiate his submission, he places reliance upon the judgment rendered by a coordinate bench of this Court in the case of SRI M.V.GURUPRASAD v. STATE OF KARNATAKA reported in W.P.61426/2016, disposed on 10.02.2023, wherein, it has held as follows: “ORDER The tone for this judgment can be set by adverting to the words of Saint Augustine (354 – 430 A.D.) in his book, The City of God, Volume 1 (426 A.D): “Without justice, what else is the State but a great band of robbers …?” 2. Petitioners being the owners of lands in question are knocking at the doors of Writ Court grieving against their acquisition vide Preliminary Notification dated 09.01.2007 issued under Section 28(1) followed by the Final Notification dated 17.05.2007 issued under Section 28(4) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioners seeks voiding of the acquisition on the following grounds that: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27599 WP No. 1707 of 2024 (i) His clients were already owners of the subject lands and therefore, their names ought to have figured in the acquisition notifications; (ii) Petitioners vide Letter dated 09.01.2013 had requested the KIADB to pass the award and pay compensation; there has been a stony silence; payment of compensation is a precondition for sustaining acquisition; (iii) Alternatively, the compensation should be paid to his clients under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act 2013 (hereafter 2013 Act), especially when the KIADB has allotted the subject lands by charging a huge sum of Rs.7.5 Crore or so, that too after giving a rebate of 50% to the allotees; (v) There is enormous delay unjustifiably brooked in making the payment of compensation, that militates against the spirit of Article 300A of the Constitution which guarantees right to property; till date no payment is made and nothing is stated about the same in the Statement of Objections filed by the KIADB. 4. After service of notice, the State has entered appearance through the learned AGA and the KIADB is represented by its Sr. Panel Counsel who has filed the Statement of Objections opposing the acquisition. Learned Panel Counsel contends that the acquisition having been completed by issuance of Final Notification on 17.05.2007, the lands have vested in the State and therefore, the same cannot be restored to the Petitioners. After the land owners notified the change of khatha pursuant to subject Sale Deeds, the Government has issued Corrigendum Notification on 05.06.2014 mentioning their names and because of the protocol process, there is some delay and now the payment of compensation will be made. So contending, they seek dismissal of Writ Petition. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition papers, although this Court rejects challenge to acquisition of lands, it is - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27599 WP No. 1707 of 2024 inclined to grant indulgence in so far as non payment of compensation, following being the reasons: (a) The 1st Petitioner bought 05 Acres & 01 Gunta of land in Sy.No.132 of Jonnahalli in Devanahalli Taluka by three registered Sale Deeds all dated 27.01.2007 and his name is mutated in the Revenue Records vide M.R. Nos.48, 49 & 50 of 2006-07 dated 22.03.2007. The 2nd Petitioner bought only 38 Guntas of land in Sy.No.66/6 of the same village vide two Sale Deeds both dated 23.12.2006 and his name came to be mutated in the Revenue Records vide M.R.No.43/2006-07 dated 14.04.2007 & M.R.No.60/2006-07 dated 21.04.2007. Thus, as on the date of Preliminary Notification i.e., 09.01.2007, names of the Petitioners had not figured as khatedars in the Revenue Records and therefore, the KIADB was justified in notifying the acquisition in the names of their vendors then, who were the Khatedars. (b) The vendors had not filed Objections to the acquisition since they had lost ownership over the lands, by virtue of registered sale deeds, is true. However, Petitioners along with other land owners had filed their Objections on 15.02.2007 vide Annexure – Q1, pursuant to the Notice dated 11.01.2007 issued by the SLAO himself under Section 28(2) of the 1966 Act. They had informed the KIADB about the land being adjacent to the village and also close to flying zone of International Airport at Devanahalli. No records are shown by the answering Respondents as to due and objective consideration of their Objections. Be that as it may. (c) Petitioners by their Representation dated 09.01.2013 had requested the KIADB at least to pay the compensation for having taken their lands; a copy of this is produced by the KIADB itself as Annexure-R1 to its Statement of Objections. They had also sent the reminder dated 01.07.2014 & 03.07.2014. In fact, the Government issued a Corrigendum Notification dated 05.06.2014 mentioning their names and thereby entitling them to payment of compensation. However, compensation has not been paid even to this day. There is no plausible explanation as to why the payment of compensation is withheld for decade and a half. It hardly needs to be stated that payment of compensation is essential when private property is acquired for public purpose; this - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27599 WP No. 1707 of 2024 mandate is ‘in-built’ in Article 300A vide K.T PLANTATION vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA (2011) 9 SCC 1. The following observations in STATE OF BIHAR vs. MAHARAJADHIRAJA SIR KAMESHWAR SINGH (1952) SCR 889 succinctly elucidate upon the jurisprudential basis for payment of compensation as a sine qua non for the acquisition as under: “…obligation to pay compensation for the property so compulsorily acquired, is not an essential ingredient of the connotation of the term, eminent domain, but is an essential element for the valid exercise of that power payment. The obligation to pay compensation arises from the natural right of the individual who is deprived of his property by such acquisition as against the power of the Sovereign to take the property in exercise of its Sovereignty…” In his 1792 essay on Property, published in the National Gazette, Madison, Chief Architect of the 5th Amendment, i.e., ‘takings clause’ of the U.S. Constitution, wrote: “Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own.” (d) Petitioners property has vested in the State vide Final Notification dated 17.05.2007.The Government issued the Corrigendum notification dated 05.06.2014. They have filed the Writ Petition on 28.11.2016 and a Coordinate Bench directed issuance of notice on 16.01.2017. At least, after service of notice, the Respondent – KIADB ought to have woken up and arranged for payment of the payment of compensation. However, strangely it has filed its Statement of Objections dated 09.04.2021 seeking dismissal of the Writ Petition contending that they have already developed the land and allotted the same to several entrepreneurs, the Allotment Letters dated 09.05.2019, 18.05.2019 & 10.06.2019 have also been produced. Except saying that there are rival claimants for compensation, there is absolutely no justification whatsoever for withholding the payment even - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27599 WP No. 1707 of 2024 when the Corrigendum Notification dated 05.06.2014 itself mentioned the names of Petitioners and not the Objectors. The lands of the Petitioners have been allotted to the entrepreneurs at a price of Rs.2.5 Crore per acre, that too after giving a rebate of 50% of the Market Value. This Court is bewildered as to how the compensation lawfully payable has been withheld when it was obviously due for payment to the Petitioners. (e) The government cannot act as a robber of citizens lands; taking away private lands for the purported public purpose sans compensation militates against the spirit of constitutional guarantee enacted u/a 300A, the fundamental right to property no longer being on the statute book, notwithstanding. It hardly needs to be stated that the State and its instrumentalities are constitutionally expected to conduct themselves with fairness & reasonableness in all their actions vide RAMANA DAYARAM SHETTY vs. INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHOITY AIR 1979 SC 1628. The conduct of the Respondent - KIADB and its officials who answer the description of ‘State’ under Article 12 of the Constitution falls militantly short of the fairness standards expected of them. (f) Lands of the Petitioners have been taken by acquisition process way back in the year 2007, is not in dispute; with Herculean task, the Petitioners got their names entered by virtue of Corrigendum Notification dated 5.6.2014. Preceding this & post this, several representations were given for payment of compensation. The sites formed in Petitioners lands on allotment have fetched Rs.7.5 Crore to the KIADB, that too, with the rebate of 50% of the market value; otherwise, it would been Rs.15 Crore, as already mentioned above. If there was a rival claim, compensation amount could have been parked in some interest earning deposits, relegating the parties to litigate. In the entire Statement of Objections, neither the State nor the KIADB has said anything about the compensation being payable to the Petitioners. The KIADB and its officials being what they are, this did not happen; such a conduct reinforces the shackles of a feudalistic attitude from which the transformative character of our constitution seeks to liberate. Their action in not paying the compensation is not only grossly - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27599 WP No. 1707 of 2024 violative of property rights constitutionally guaranteed under Article 300A but gnaws at overarching objectives of a Welfare State ordained under the Constitution. (g) The Apex Court in RADHEY SHYAM vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH, (2011) 5 SCC 545 has observed as under: “…while examining the land owner's challenge to the acquisition of land in a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the High Court should not adopt a pedantic approach, but decide the matter keeping in view the constitutional goals of social and economic justice and the fact that even though the right to property is no longer a fundamental right, the same continues to be an important constitutional right and in terms of Article 300-A, no person can be deprived of his property except by authority of law…” This Court cannot deny justice that is eminently due to the aggrieved citizens by quoting some constitutional theories. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes in DAVIS vs. MILLS, 194 U.S. 451 (1904) had observed: “Constitutions are intended to preserve practical and substantial rights, not to maintain theories …”. (h) There is force in the submission of learned counsel for the Petitioners that the compensation should be fixed on the principles broadly enacted in 2013 Act, because of the enormity of delay & callousness of the Respondents in unjustifiably withholding the payment of compensation for about a decade & a half despite receiving about Rs.7.5 Crore from the allottees of the sites with a rebate of 50% Market Value; otherwise, arithmetically speaking, it would have been Rs.15 Crore. He banks upon a Coordinate Bench decision in W.P.Nos. 108802/2016 c/w 107748/2014, 100762/2017 between SHEENAPPA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA disposed off on 18.07.2022 directing payment of compensation under the 2013 Act. However, it is told at the Bar that this decision has been stayed by a Division Bench in W.A. No.100393/2022. Be that - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27599 WP No. 1707 of 2024 as it may. Justice of the case warrants that the Petitioners be paid at least 50% of the compensation to be computed under the provisions of 2013 Act, along with solatium, interest & such other things. This Court hastens to add that, in special circumstances of the case and because of the stay of Coordinate Bench decision, the provisions of the 2013 Act are taken only for the purpose of determining/re-fixing the compensation amount on a normative basis till after & subject to decision in the Writ Appeal. It hardly needs to be stated that the Writ Courts being the custodians of Constitutional Rights of the citizens, have to individualize justice taking into account the facts & circumstances of the case at hands. In the above circumstances, this Court makes the following directions: (i) This Writ Petition succeeds in part. Although challenge to the acquisition of the subject lands is negatived, a Writ of Mandamus issues to the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 to determine/re-fix the compensation at the rate of 50% to be computed under the provisions of Section 77 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 along with solatium, interest & such other benefits. (ii) The Respondent Nos.2 to 4 are directed to pay to the Petitioners within eight weeks the amount of compensation to be determined as per the direction issued in the immediately preceding paragraph (i) with additional interest at the rate of 12% per annum to be computed from the date, the possession of subject lands was taken away from the Petitioners; and (iii) In the event, the Writ Appeal No.100393/2022 is dismissed, upholding the judgment of the Coordinate Bench in W.P.Nos.108802/2016 c/w 107748/2014, 100762/2017 between SHEENAPPA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA disposed off on 18.07.2022, Petitioners - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27599 WP No. 1707 of 2024 shall be paid the compensation to be determined under the provisions of 2013 Act minus what is paid in terms of the above directions. (iv) The Respondent-KIADB shall pay to the Petitioners, the cost to be computed at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per Acre. Time for compliance of all the above directions is three months. Should delay be brooked, Petitioners shall be paid an additional interest at the rate of 2% per mensum which may be recovered from the erring officials of the State/KIADB, in accordance with law.” (Emphasis supplied) Learned counsel for respondents would submit that if reasonable time is granted, the claim of the petitioners would be assessed in accordance with law and appropriate action would be taken. 5. At the time of hearing of the petition, there sprung an impleading applicant, contending that he is also a family member and entitled to compensation. Be his claim as it is. 6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties and have perused the material on record. - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27599 WP No. 1707 of 2024 7. The afore-narrated facts are what is averred in the petition. It is the case of the petitioners that their lands stood acquired pursuant to the proceedings instituted under the Act. Under such acquisition recommendation is made, it reads as follows: "£ÀA.J¯ï.J£ï.r/¹.Dgï/304/2022-23 ¢£ÁAPÀ:9/02/2023 ರವೆ ೇಷ ಭೂ ಾೕಾಾಗಳ ೆ.ಐ.ಎ.. ಅರಮೆ ರೆ, ೆಂಗಳರು. ಾನ"#ೇ, ಷಯ: ಾಲೂರು &ಾಲೂ'ಕು, ಕಸಾ *ೋಬ,, ಾವನಹ,. ಾ/ಮದ ಸ.ನಂ-119/123 ಜ3ೕ4ನ 5ೈ7 16-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಜ3ೕ4ೆ ೈಜ&ೆ ವರ8 4ೕಡುವ ಬೆ: ಉ<ೆ'ೕಖ: 1 ) ತಮC ಕDೇಯ ಪತ/ ಸಂFೆ": ೆ.ಐ.ಎ../ಎI.ಎ.ಕೂ"/ 2916/22-23 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 21/12/2022. 2) ಅJ<ೇFಾಲಯ ರವರ ವರ8 ಸಂFೆ":ಆL.ೆ/M.ಆL/f.J¯ï/ 78/22-23. ~***~ NೕಲOಂಡ ಷಯೆO ಸಂಬಂMದಂ&ೆ ಾಲೂರು &ಾಲೂ'ಕು, ಕಸಾ *ೋಬ,, ಾವನಹ,. ಾ/ಮದ ಸ.ನಂ-119/123 ಜ3ೕ4ನ 5ೈ7 16-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಜ3ೕ4ೆ ೈಜ&ೆ ವರ8 4ೕಡುವ ಬೆ:. ಉ<ೆ'ೕಖ(2) ರಂ&ೆ ಈ ಕDೇಯ ಅJ<ೇFಾಲಯದ ಷಯ4QಾRಹಕರು 4ೕರುವ ವರ8 *ಾಗೂ Sಾಖ<ೆಗTಾದ ೈ ಬರಹದ ಪಹUಯಂ&ೆ ಪVೕWಸ<ಾX ಸದ ಾವನಹ,. ಾ/ಮದ ಸ.ನಂ 119/123 ರ 1991-92 ಂದ 1999-2000 ಾWನ ಪಹUಯಂ&ೆ ಜ3ೕ4ನ - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27599 WP No. 1707 of 2024 5ೈ7 .ಸರSಾL MಂY Z ಭಗQಾZ MಂY ರವೆ 2-00 ಎಕ#ೆ, ಹMಂY Z ಭಗQಾZ MಂY ರವೆ 2-00 ಎಕ#ೆ, . #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY Z SೇMಂY ರವೆ 4-00 ಎಕ#ೆ, . ಉದ\ಾನು MಂY Z .SೇMಂY ರವೆ 4-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಭುವೇಶಾ\ Z SೇMಂY ರವೆ 2-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ೆ.ಇಂದ/MಂY Z ಕೃಷ`MಂY ರವೆ 2-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಜ3ೕನು ಐ.*ೆa.ಆL ನಂ&ೆ ಎಂ.ಆL/533/1992--93 ರಂ&ೆ Fಾ&ೆbಾXರುವcದು ಕಂಡುಬಂ8ರುತSೆ *ಾಗೂ ಸದ Sಾಖ<ೆಗಳ ೈಜ&ೆdಂದ ಕೂರುತSೆ. ಅದರಂ&ೆ ಅದರಂ&ೆ ಅದರಂ&ೆ ಅದರಂ&ೆ ಪVೕWಸ<ಾX ಪVೕWಸ<ಾX ಪVೕWಸ<ಾX ಪVೕWಸ<ಾX ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಜ3ೕನು ಜ3ೕನು ಜ3ೕನು ಜ3ೕನು ೋ ಾಳ ೋ ಾಳ ೋ ಾಳ ೋ ಾಳ ಜ3ೕಾXದುe ಜ3ೕಾXದುe ಜ3ೕಾXದುe ಜ3ೕಾXದುe, ಅfRSಾರರು ಅfRSಾರರು ಅfRSಾರರು ಅfRSಾರರು ಸW'Mರುವ ಸW'Mರುವ ಸW'Mರುವ ಸW'Mರುವ Sಾಖ<ೆಗಳಂ&ೆ Sಾಖ<ೆಗಳಂ&ೆ Sಾಖ<ೆಗಳಂ&ೆ Sಾಖ<ೆಗಳಂ&ೆ ಪVೕWಸ<ಾX ಪVೕWಸ<ಾX ಪVೕWಸ<ಾX ಪVೕWಸ<ಾX, ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಜ3ೕನು ಜ3ೕನು ಜ3ೕನು ಜ3ೕನು ಕ/ಯಪತ/ದ ಕ/ಯಪತ/ದ ಕ/ಯಪತ/ದ ಕ/ಯಪತ/ದ ಸಂFೆ" ಸಂFೆ" ಸಂFೆ" ಸಂFೆ" 981/1962-63 8ಾಂಕ 8ಾಂಕ 8ಾಂಕ 8ಾಂಕ:20/06/1962 ರಂ&ೆ ರಂ&ೆ ರಂ&ೆ ರಂ&ೆ 16-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಜ3ೕನು ಜ3ೕನು ಜ3ೕನು ಜ3ೕನು ಮು4ಯಪg ಮು4ಯಪg ಮು4ಯಪg ಮು4ಯಪg ರವಂದ ರವಂದ ರವಂದ ರವಂದ .SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY ರವೆ ಕ/ಯQಾXರುತSೆ ರವೆ ಕ/ಯQಾXರುತSೆ ರವೆ ಕ/ಯQಾXರುತSೆ ರವೆ ಕ/ಯQಾXರುತSೆ, ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಕ/ಯಪತ/ದW' ಕ/ಯಪತ/ದW' ಕ/ಯಪತ/ದW' ಕ/ಯಪತ/ದW' ಮು4ಯಪg ಮು4ಯಪg ಮು4ಯಪg ಮು4ಯಪg ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಜ3ೕನು ಜ3ೕನು ಜ3ೕನು ಜ3ೕನು ಜಹXೕL ಜಹXೕL ಜಹXೕL ಜಹXೕL ರವಂದ ರವಂದ ರವಂದ ರವಂದ Fಾಯಂ Fಾಯಂ Fಾಯಂ Fಾಯಂ ಕಂSಾಯೆO ಕಂSಾಯೆO ಕಂSಾಯೆO ಕಂSಾಯೆO ಪhೆ8ರುತSೆ ಪhೆ8ರುತSೆ ಪhೆ8ರುತSೆ ಪhೆ8ರುತSೆ ಎಂದು ಎಂದು ಎಂದು ಎಂದು ನಮೂSಾXರುತSೆ ನಮೂSಾXರುತSೆ ನಮೂSಾXರುತSೆ ನಮೂSಾXರುತSೆ. ತದನಂತರ ತದನಂತರ ತದನಂತರ ತದನಂತರ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಜ3ೕನು ಜ3ೕನು ಜ3ೕನು ಜ3ೕನು MI MI MI MI ಾ"bಾಲಯದ ಾ"bಾಲಯದ ಾ"bಾಲಯದ ಾ"bಾಲಯದ ಆSೇಶ ಆSೇಶ ಆSೇಶ ಆSೇಶ ಸಂFೆ" ಸಂFೆ" ಸಂFೆ" ಸಂFೆ":ಒಎj ಒಎj ಒಎj ಒಎj/17/63 8ಾಂಕ 8ಾಂಕ 8ಾಂಕ 8ಾಂಕ:21-12-1964 ರಂ&ೆ ರಂ&ೆ ರಂ&ೆ ರಂ&ೆ Qಾ8ಯವ#ಾದ Qಾ8ಯವ#ಾದ Qಾ8ಯವ#ಾದ Qಾ8ಯವ#ಾದ SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY Z Z Z Z ಭಗQಾZ ಭಗQಾZ ಭಗQಾZ ಭಗQಾZ MಂY ರವೆ MಂY ರವೆ MಂY ರವೆ MಂY ರವೆ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಜ3ೕ4ನ ಜ3ೕ4ನ ಜ3ೕ4ನ ಜ3ೕ4ನ ಹಕOನುk ಹಕOನುk ಹಕOನುk ಹಕOನುk ರುಜುQಾತು ರುಜುQಾತು ರುಜುQಾತು ರುಜುQಾತು ಪhೆMದುe ಪhೆMದುe ಪhೆMದುe ಪhೆMದುe, ಹಕುOSಾರರು ಹಕುOSಾರರು ಹಕುOSಾರರು ಹಕುOSಾರರು ಆXದುe ಆXದುe ಆXದುe ಆXದುe, ಅದರಂ&ೆ ಅದರಂ&ೆ ಅದರಂ&ೆ ಅದರಂ&ೆ ಅನುಭವದW'ದುe ಅನುಭವದW'ದುe ಅನುಭವದW'ದುe ಅನುಭವದW'ದುe, ಇವರ ಇವರ ಇವರ ಇವರ ಪರQಾX ಪರQಾX ಪರQಾX ಪರQಾX 7/ 7/ 7/ 7/ ಆSೇಶ ಆSೇಶ ಆSೇಶ ಆSೇಶ *ೊರMರು&ಾ#ೆ *ೊರMರು&ಾ#ೆ *ೊರMರು&ಾ#ೆ *ೊರMರು&ಾ#ೆ. *ಾಗೂ *ಾಗೂ *ಾಗೂ *ಾಗೂ ೈ ೈ ೈ ೈ ಬರಹದ ಬರಹದ ಬರಹದ ಬರಹದ ಪಹUಯW' ಪಹUಯW' ಪಹUಯW' ಪಹUಯW' ಎಂ ಎಂ ಎಂ ಎಂ.ಆL ಆL ಆL ಆL.24/1991-92 ರಂ&ೆ ರಂ&ೆ ರಂ&ೆ ರಂ&ೆ ಪಹU ಪಹU ಪಹU ಪಹU ಆXರುತSೆ ಆXರುತSೆ ಆXರುತSೆ ಆXರುತSೆ. ಎಂಆL ಎಂಆL ಎಂಆL ಎಂಆL ಪ/l ಪ/l ಪ/l ಪ/l ಲಗlMSೆ ಲಗlMSೆ ಲಗlMSೆ ಲಗlMSೆ. ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಾವನಹ,. ಾವನಹ,. ಾವನಹ,. ಾವನಹ,. ಾ/ಮದ ಾ/ಮದ ಾ/ಮದ ಾ/ಮದ ಸಸಸಸ.ನಂ ನಂ ನಂ ನಂ 119/111123 ಜ3ೕ4ನ ಜ3ೕ4ನ ಜ3ೕ4ನ ಜ3ೕ4ನ 5ೈ7 5ೈ7 5ೈ7 5ೈ7 .ಸರSಾL ಸರSಾL ಸರSಾL ಸರSಾL MಂY MಂY MಂY MಂY Z Z Z Z ಭಗQಾZ ಭಗQಾZ ಭಗQಾZ ಭಗQಾZ MಂY MಂY MಂY MಂY ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ 2-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ, ಹMಂY ಹMಂY ಹMಂY ಹMಂY Z Z Z Z ಭಗQಾZ ಭಗQಾZ ಭಗQಾZ ಭಗQಾZ MಂY MಂY MಂY MಂY ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ 2-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ, . #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY Z Z Z Z SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ 4-00 ಎಎಎಎಕ#ೆ ಕ#ೆ ಕ#ೆ ಕ#ೆ, . ಉದ\ ಉದ\ ಉದ\ ಉದ\ಾನು ಾನು ಾನು ಾನು MಂY MಂY MಂY MಂY Z Z Z Z .SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ 4-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಭುವೇಶಾ\ ಭುವೇಶಾ\ ಭುವೇಶಾ\ ಭುವೇಶಾ\ Z Z Z Z SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ 2-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ೆೆೆೆ.ಇಂದ/MಂY ಇಂದ/MಂY ಇಂದ/MಂY ಇಂದ/MಂY Z Z Z Z ಕೃಷ`MಂY ಕೃಷ`MಂY ಕೃಷ`MಂY ಕೃಷ`MಂY ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ 2-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಜ3ೕನು ಜ3ೕನು ಜ3ೕನು ಜ3ೕನು ಐಐಐಐ.*ೆa *ೆa *ೆa *ೆa.ಆL ಆL ಆL ಆL ನಂ&ೆ ನಂ&ೆ ನಂ&ೆ ನಂ&ೆ ಎಂ ಎಂ ಎಂ ಎಂ.ಆL ಆL ಆL ಆL/533/1992-93 ರಂ&ೆ ರಂ&ೆ ರಂ&ೆ ರಂ&ೆ Fಾ&ೆbಾXರುವcದು Fಾ&ೆbಾXರುವcದು Fಾ&ೆbಾXರುವcದು Fಾ&ೆbಾXರುವcದು ಕಂಡುಬಂ8ರುತSೆ ಕಂಡುಬಂ8ರುತSೆ ಕಂಡುಬಂ8ರುತSೆ ಕಂಡುಬಂ8ರುತSೆ. ಪ/l ಪ/l ಪ/l ಪ/l ಲಗತು ಲಗತು ಲಗತು ಲಗತು, ತದನಂತರ ತದನಂತರ ತದನಂತರ ತದನಂತರ *ಾ *ಾ *ಾ *ಾಗೂ ಗೂ ಗೂ ಗೂ ಹMಂY ಹMಂY ಹMಂY ಹMಂY Z Z Z Z ಭಗQಾZ ಭಗQಾZ ಭಗQಾZ ಭಗQಾZMಂY MಂY MಂY MಂY ರವಂದ ರವಂದ ರವಂದ ರವಂದ . #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY Z Z Z Z SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ಕ/ಯ ಕ/ಯ ಕ/ಯ ಕ/ಯ ಪತ/ದ ಪತ/ದ ಪತ/ದ ಪತ/ದ ಸಂFೆ" ಸಂFೆ" ಸಂFೆ" ಸಂFೆ"::::JA.J¯ï.Dgï.-1-02185-2003-04, ¢£ÁAPÀ: 15-12-2003 gÀAvÉ 2-00 JPÀgÉ d«ÄãÀÄ ಕ/ಯQಾXದುe ಕ/ಯQಾXದುe ಕ/ಯQಾXದುe ಕ/ಯQಾXದುe ಎಂ ಎಂ ಎಂ ಎಂ.ಆL ಆL ಆL ಆL.19/2003-04 8ಾಂಕ 8ಾಂಕ 8ಾಂಕ 8ಾಂಕ:20/02/2004 ರಂ&ೆ ರಂ&ೆ ರಂ&ೆ ರಂ&ೆ Fಾ&ೆ Fಾ&ೆ Fಾ&ೆ Fಾ&ೆ ಪಹU ಪಹU ಪಹU ಪಹU ಆXರುತSೆ ಆXರುತSೆ ಆXರುತSೆ ಆXರುತSೆ, *ಾW *ಾW *ಾW *ಾW ಗಣ7ೕ ಗಣ7ೕ ಗಣ7ೕ ಗಣ7ೕಕೃತ ಕೃತ ಕೃತ ಕೃತ ಪಹUಯಂ&ೆ ಪಹUಯಂ&ೆ ಪಹUಯಂ&ೆ ಪಹUಯಂ&ೆ .ಸರSಾL ಸರSಾL ಸರSಾL ಸರSಾL MಂY MಂY MಂY MಂY Z Z Z Z ಭಗQಾZ ಭಗQಾZ ಭಗQಾZ ಭಗQಾZ MಂY MಂY MಂY MಂY ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ 2-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ, . #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY Z Z Z Z SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ 4-00 ಭುವೇಶಾ\ ಭುವೇಶಾ\ ಭುವೇಶಾ\ ಭುವೇಶಾ\ Z Z Z Z SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ 2-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ೆೆೆೆ.ಇಂದ/MಂY ಇಂದ/MಂY ಇಂದ/MಂY ಇಂದ/MಂY Z Z Z Z ಕೃಷ`MಂY ಕೃಷ`MಂY ಕೃಷ`MಂY ಕೃಷ`MಂY ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ 2-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ . #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY Z Z Z Z SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ 2-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎj ಎj ಎj ಎj.ffff.ಲnoೕಾd ಲnoೕಾd ಲnoೕಾd ಲnoೕಾd ೋಂ ೋಂ ೋಂ ೋಂ ..ಉದ\ ಉದ\ ಉದ\ ಉದ\ ಾನುMಂY ಾನುMಂY ಾನುMಂY ಾನುMಂY ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ 4-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಬರುlರುlದುe ಬರುlರುlದುe ಬರುlರುlದುe ಬರುlರುlದುe, *ಾಗೂ *ಾಗೂ *ಾಗೂ *ಾಗೂ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಜ3ೕ4ೆ ಜ3ೕ4ೆ ಜ3ೕ4ೆ ಜ3ೕ4ೆ ಸಂಬಂ8Mದಂ&ೆ ಸಂಬಂ8Mದಂ&ೆ ಸಂಬಂ8Mದಂ&ೆ ಸಂಬಂ8Mದಂ&ೆ ಾ/ಮ ಾ/ಮ ಾ/ಮ ಾ/ಮ ಆಡ,&ಾ8ಗಳವರ ಆಡ,&ಾ8ಗಳವರ ಆಡ,&ಾ8ಗಳವರ ಆಡ,&ಾ8ಗಳವರ ಅನುಭವದ ಅನುಭವದ ಅನುಭವದ ಅನುಭವದ ಬೆ: ಬೆ: ಬೆ: ಬೆ: ದೃೕಕರಣ ದೃೕಕರಣ ದೃೕಕರಣ ದೃೕಕರಣ 4ೕದುe 4ೕದುe 4ೕದುe 4ೕದುe, ಅದರಂ&ೆ ಅದರಂ&ೆ ಅದರಂ&ೆ ಅದರಂ&ೆ .ಸರSಾL ಸರSಾL ಸರSಾL ಸರSಾL MಂY MಂY MಂY MಂY Z Z Z Z ಭಗQಾZ ಭಗQಾZ ಭಗQಾZ ಭಗQಾZ MಂY MಂY MಂY MಂY - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27599 WP No. 1707 of 2024 ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ 2-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ, . #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY Z Z Z Z SೇMಂ SೇMಂ SೇMಂ SೇMಂY Y Y Y ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ 4-00 ಭುವೇಶಾ\ ಭುವೇಶಾ\ ಭುವೇಶಾ\ ಭುವೇಶಾ\ Z Z Z Z SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ 2-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ೆೆೆೆ.ಇಂದ/MಂY ಇಂದ/MಂY ಇಂದ/MಂY ಇಂದ/MಂY Z Z Z Z ಕೃಷ`MಂY ಕೃಷ`MಂY ಕೃಷ`MಂY ಕೃಷ`MಂY ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ 2-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ . #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY #ಾಮಚಂದ/MಂY Z Z Z Z SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY SೇMಂY ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ 2-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎj ಎj ಎj ಎj.ffff.ಲnoೕಾd ಲnoೕಾd ಲnoೕಾd ಲnoೕಾd ೋಂ ೋಂ ೋಂ ೋಂ ..ಉದ\ ಾನುMಂY ಉದ\ ಾನುMಂY ಉದ\ ಾನುMಂY ಉದ\ ಾನುMಂY ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ ರವೆ 4-00 ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಎಕ#ೆ ಜ3ೕ4ನW' ಜ3ೕ4ನW' ಜ3ೕ4ನW' ಜ3ೕ4ನW' ಅನುಭವದW'ರು&ಾ#ೆ ಅನುಭವದW'ರು&ಾ#ೆ ಅನುಭವದW'ರು&ಾ#ೆ ಅನುಭವದW'ರು&ಾ#ೆ. ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಜ3ೕ4ೆ ಜ3ೕ4ೆ ಜ3ೕ4ೆ ಜ3ೕ4ೆ ಸಂಬಂ8Mದಂ&ೆ ಸಂಬಂ8Mದಂ&ೆ ಸಂಬಂ8Mದಂ&ೆ ಸಂಬಂ8Mದಂ&ೆ ಲಭ"ರುವ ಲಭ"ರುವ ಲಭ"ರುವ ಲಭ"ರುವ ಪಹU ಪಹU ಪಹU ಪಹU, ಕ/ಯ ಕ/ಯ ಕ/ಯ ಕ/ಯ ಪತ/ ಪತ/ ಪತ/ ಪತ/ ಮು"pೇಶZ ಮು"pೇಶZ ಮು"pೇಶZ ಮು"pೇಶZ Sಾಖ<ೆಗಳನುk Sಾಖ<ೆಗಳನುk Sಾಖ<ೆಗಳನುk Sಾಖ<ೆಗಳನುk ಲಗlMದುe ಲಗlMದುe ಲಗlMದುe ಲಗlMದುe, ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಸದ ಜ3ೕ4ನ ಜ3ೕ4ನ ಜ3ೕ4ನ ಜ3ೕ4ನ ಅನುಭವದ ಅನುಭವದ ಅನುಭವದ ಅನುಭವದ ಬೆ: ಬೆ: ಬೆ: ಬೆ: ಪVೕWM ಪVೕWM ಪVೕWM ಪVೕWM ಖqತಪMೊಂಡ ಖqತಪMೊಂಡ ಖqತಪMೊಂಡ ಖqತಪMೊಂಡ ನಂತರQೇ ನಂತರQೇ ನಂತರQೇ ನಂತರQೇ ಪ*ಾರ ಪ*ಾರ ಪ*ಾರ ಪ*ಾರ 4ೕಡಲು 4ೕಡಲು 4ೕಡಲು 4ೕಡಲು ೋ ೋ ೋ ೋ ವರ8ಯನುk ವರ8ಯನುk ವರ8ಯನುk ವರ8ಯನುk ತಮCW' ತಮCW' ತಮCW' ತಮCW' 4Qೇ8ಸು&ಾ 4Qೇ8ಸು&ಾ 4Qೇ8ಸು&ಾ 4Qೇ8ಸು&ಾ ಮುಂ8ನ ಮುಂ8ನ ಮುಂ8ನ ಮುಂ8ನ ಕ/ಮೆO ಕ/ಮೆO ಕ/ಮೆO ಕ/ಮೆO ತಮC ತಮC ತಮC ತಮC ಕDೇೆ ಕDೇೆ ಕDೇೆ ಕDೇೆ ವರ8 ವರ8 ವರ8 ವರ8 ಸW'MSೆ ಸW'MSೆ ಸW'MSೆ ಸW'MSೆ." (Emphasis added) The communication is an indication that the petitioners have submitted all the documents for the purpose of consideration and the compensation to be granted. Despite this, it appears that no order is passed granting compensation. The Apex Court in the case of PUNJAB COMMUNICATIONS LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA reported in (1999) 4 SCC 727, has held as follows: "…. …. …. 37. The above survey of cases shows that the doctrine of legitimate expectation in the substantive sense has been accepted as part of our law and that the decision-maker can normally be compelled to give effect to his representation in regard to the expectation based on previous practice or past conduct unless some overriding public interest comes in the way. The judgment in Raghunathan case [(1998) 7 SCC 66 : 1998 SCC (L&S) 1770] requires that reliance must have been placed on the - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27599 WP No. 1707 of 2024 said representation and the representee must have thereby suffered detriment." (Emphasis supplied) In the light of the aforesaid circumstance, I deem it appropriate to dispose the petition, directing consideration of the case of the petitioners in accordance with law bearing in mind the observations made in the course of the order as also the impleading applicant. Action taken shall be communicated to the petitioners. All contentions urged by the petitioners except the one considered hereinabove, shall remain open. 8. In the light of the aforesaid order, consideration of the application seeking impleadment is unnecessary and the same is disposed as having become unnecessary. 9. Accordingly, writ petition stands allowed. SD/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE nvj List No.: 1 Sl No.: 98