- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36053 WP No. 16672 of 2025 C/W WP No. 17556 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 16672 OF 2025 (LA-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 17556 OF 2025 (LA-RES) IN WP No. 16672/2025 BETWEEN: SMT. CHANNABASAMMA W/O LATE HANUMANTHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS, R/A BHEEMASANDRA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK TUMAKURU – 572 107. …PETITIONER (BY SRI VIRUPAKSHAIAH P.H., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER TUMKUR RAYADURGA NEW BROAD GAUGE RAILWAY PROJECT, Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36053 WP No. 16672 of 2025 C/W WP No. 17556 of 2025 MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, TUMAKURU – 572 105. 3. THE GENERAL MANAGER SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAYS, KESHAVAPURA, HUBLI – 580 023. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M.RAJ KUMAR, AGA FOR R-1; SRI H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN, DSGI, FOR R2 AND R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE AWARD BEARING NO. SLAO S.R. (THU-RA RAILWAY) 08 / 2011-12 DATED 29.10.2013 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AUTHORITY VIDE ANNEXURE-A IN RESPECT OF THE LANDS BEARING SY. NO. 146/1 MEASURING TO AN EXTENT OF 04 GUNTAS AND SY. NO.147 MEASURING TO AN EXTENT OF 0-15.8 GUNTAS SITUATED AT TUMKUR AMANIKERE (PART-II), KASABA HOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK AND DISTRICT IN RESPECT OF PETITIONER IS CONCERNED; DIRECT THE 2ND RESPONDENT AUTHORITY TO MAKE PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF THE ACQUIRED LANDS UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013. IN WP NO. 17556/2025 BETWEEN: 1. NARASAMMA W/O SIDDAIAH, D/O UGRAIAH, AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS, R/A BHEEMASANDRA, BELLAVI ROAD, 6TH WARD, TUMAKURU – 572 107.) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36053 WP No. 16672 of 2025 C/W WP No. 17556 of 2025 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI VIRUPAKSHAIAH P.H., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER TUMKUR RAYADURGA NEW BROAD GAUGE RAILWAY PROJECT, MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, TUMAKURU – 572 105. 3. THE GENERAL MANAGER SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAYS, KESHAVAPURA, HUBLI – 580 023. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M.RAJKUMAR, AGA FOR R1; SRI H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN., DSGI FOR R2 AND R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) QUASHING THE AWARD BEARING NO. SLAO S.R. (THU-RA RAILWAY) 02/2011-12 DATED 23.10.2013 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AUTHORITY VIDE ANNEXURE-A IN RESPECT OF THE LAND BEARING SY. NO. 145/1B SITUATED AT TUMKUR AMANIKERE (PART-I) VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK AND DISTRICT MEASURING TO AN EXTENT OF 05 GUNTAS IN RESPECT OF PETITIONER IS - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36053 WP No. 16672 of 2025 C/W WP No. 17556 of 2025 CONCERNED; B) DIRECTING THE 2ND RESPONDENT AUTHORITY TO MAKE PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF THE ACQUIRED LAND UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioners are before this Court calling in question an award dated 29-10-2013 and 23-10-2023 passed by the 2nd respondent and for a direction to pay the compensation under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. 2. Heard Sri P H Virupakshaiah, learned counsel appearing for petitioner, Sri M Rajkumar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri H - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36053 WP No. 16672 of 2025 C/W WP No. 17556 of 2025 Shanthi Bhushan, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for respondents 2 and 3. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue in the lis stands answered by the coordinate bench in the case of R P RAMAIAH v. STATE OF KARNATAKA rendered in W.P.No.4600 of 2022 disposed on 03-02-2025. The coordinate bench holds as follows: “Petitioner claiming to be the owner of the land bearing Sy.No.149/3, measuring 19 guntas situated at Tumakuru Amanikere (Part-2), Kasaba Hobli, Tumakuru Taluk which is acquired for the purpose of Tumakuru - Rayadurga Broad Gauge Railway Project under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 vide preliminary notification dated 29.09.2011 and the final notification dated 15.06.2012, is before this Court contending that by the time the final notification and award came to be passed on 23.10.2013, the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 2013') had come into force, as such the petitioner was entitled to the compensation in terms of the said Act, 2013. 2. Sri. Yogesh U Kotemoth, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the matter is covered by the Order dated 21.07.2016 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the writ petition No.23524-23537/2014 and 26802-26807/2014 which has been followed by the another Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.06.2019 in W.P.No.1087- 91/2018 C/w 49831-834/2017 and 52811-812/2017. Hence, seeks for extending similar relief for the petitioner as well. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents do not dispute the same. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36053 WP No. 16672 of 2025 C/W WP No. 17556 of 2025 4. This Court under identical facts situation of the matter, taking note of the aforesaid aspects with respect to the very same acquisition had allowed the writ petition by setting aside the award and directing the Competent authority to pass fresh award in terms of the provisions of the Act, 2013. It has also made clear if the compensation, if any has been received by the petitioner, the same was to be deducted while re-determining the compensation under the Act, 2013. Relevant portion of the said order reads as under: '' 7. Now the Court is required to examine whether the impugned award notices are sustainable and if they are not sustainable what relief is to be given to the petitioners. To answer this question, the advertence is required to be made to the provisions contained in Section 24 of the 2013 Act: “24. Land acquisition process under Act No.1 of 1894 shall be deemed to have lapsed in certain cases.– (1) xxxxxxxxxxxx (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), in case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894), where an award under the said section 11 has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of this Act but the physical possession of the land has not been taken or the compensation has not been paid the said proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed and the appropriate Government, if it so chooses, shall initiate the proceedings of such land acquisition afresh in accordance with the provisions of the Act: Provided that where an award has been made and compensation in respect of a majority of land holdings has not been deposited in the account of the beneficiaries, then, all beneficiaries specified in the notification for acquisition under section 4 of the said Land Acquisition Act, shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Act.” - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36053 WP No. 16672 of 2025 C/W WP No. 17556 of 2025 8. The perusal of the afore-extracted provisions reveals that if compensation amounts in respect of majority of land holdings are not deposited as on the date of the commencement of the said Act (1.1.2014), then the compensation is required to be determined as per the provisions of the said 2013 Act. In the instant case it is not in dispute that the compensation amount in respect of the majority of land holdings is not deposited. The compensation amounts are deposited only in respect of 9 acres 34½ guntas out of the acquired extent measuring 47 acres 24¾ guntas. As the afore-extracted provisions are attracted to the facts of this case, I quash the impugned award notices and direct the respondent No.4 or any other concerned functionary to re-determine the compensation in accordance with the provisions of the 2013 Act. This exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible and in any case within an outer limit of four months from the date of the issuance of the certified copy of today’s order. 9. Needless to observe that if any of the petitioners has already received the compensation, that amount has to be deducted from the amounts to be re-determined under the provisions of the 2013 Act.'' 5. Petitioner being similarly situated, this Court do not see any reason to differ from the same….” 4. Learned counsel for the respondents would not dispute the same. 5. In the light of the issue standing answered by the coordinate bench supra, and the same being applicable to the cases at hand as well on all its fours, these petitions are also required to be considered on the same terms. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36053 WP No. 16672 of 2025 C/W WP No. 17556 of 2025 6. Accordingly, both the petitions are allowed. The Respondent-Authorities shall consider the case of the petitioners in terms of the aforesaid directions issued by this Court in the order dated 21-07-2016 passed in Writ Petition No.23524-23537/2014 and 26802-26807/2014 and order dated 19.06.2019 in W.P.No.1087-91/2018 C/w 49831-834/2017 and 52811-812/2017. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE BKP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 12