Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 25996 (KAR)

CHANNAMMA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/17710/2026 · 2026-06-19

R Nataraj

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30296 WP No. 17710 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 17710 OF 2026 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN: 1. CHANNAMMA W/O LATE M. THIMMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, R/O BHAIRAVI NILAYA, MG ROAD, OPPOSITE FOOD COURT, MOTHER TERESA ROAD, VIDYANAGAR, HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT-573 202 2. KUMAR S/O BELURE GOWDA C/O ANIL KUMAR AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/O YELAWALA, MYSORE DISTRICT-571 130 3. B.N. SUDHAKAR S/O LATE NINGEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/O ADUVALLI, HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT-573 201 4. SUSHEELA W/O CHANNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O GAVENAHALLI, HASSAN TALUK AND DIST - 573 201 5. GANGADHARA D.M S/O MALIGE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/O. RTO OFFICE ROAD, 60 FEET ROAD OPPOSITE, Digitally signed by HEMALATHA J Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30296 WP No. 17710 of 2026 NEAR SHEKAR LAYOUT, KATIHALLI, HASSAN TALUK AN D DIST.-573 201 6. KRISHNA KUMAR G.R. S/O. LATE RAJEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O GAVENAHALLI, HASSAN TALUK AND DIST.-573 201 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. YASHWANTH M., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. GIRISH B BALADARE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES, VIKAS SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560001 REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT 2. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO.49, 4TH AND 5TH FLOOR, KANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE -560001. 3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER KIADB, KRS ROAD, METAGALLI INDUSTRIAL AREA NEAR VIKRANTH TYRES, MYSORE-570001. 4. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ZONAL BOARD INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CENTER, HOLENARASIPURA ROAD, HASSAN-573201 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ADITYA DIWAKAR, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1; SRI. H.N. VASUDEVAN, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 TO 4) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30296 WP No. 17710 of 2026 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 AND 4 I.E., SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, KIADB, KRS ROAD, METAGALLI INDUSTRIAL AREA, NEAR VIKRANTH TYRES, MYSORE AND KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ZONAL BOARD, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CENTER, HOLENARASIPURA ROAD, HASSAN TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION GIVEN BY THE PETITIONERS DATED 01.06.2026 AS PER ANNEXURE-F1 AND F2, PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS THEREON IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioners have sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondents Nos.3 and 4 to consider their representations dated 01.06.2026 and pass appropriate orders. 2. (i) All the petitioners claim that they are the owners of certain lands situate in Gavenahalli, Kasturavalli, Busthenahalli, Doddahonnenalli, Kasba Hobli, Hassan Taluk and District which were notified by the respondent No.1 under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30296 WP No. 17710 of 2026 Act, 1966 (henceforth referred to as 'Act, 1966' for short). They contend that the respondent No.1 proceeded to issue a final notification under Section 28(4) of the Act, 1966 without complying Section 28(3) of the Act, 1966. Hence the petitioners were advised to challenge the notifications in W.P. Nos.24322- 24340/2012 and connected petitions. The said writ petitions were allowed and the final notification was quashed. (ii) They contend that as per the directions issued by this Court in the aforesaid writ petitions, the petitioners appeared before the Land Acquisition Officer, filed their objections and requested that the acquisition proceedings be dropped. Subsequently, some of the land losers whose challenge to the acquisition had failed, approached the respondents for allotment of developed land in view of the decisions taken by the State Government dated 23.02.2021. They contend that in several writ petitions filed by land losers before this Court in W.P. Nos.10406/2016, 18849/2016, 4810/ 2021, 56533/2015, 48560/2017 and 48295/2017, the Coordinate bench of this Court issued directions for allotment of developed land in lieu of cash compensation. The petitioners - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30296 WP No. 17710 of 2026 who are similarly placed and whose lands were also acquired for the very same project, filed representations dated 01.06.2026 agreeing to give up their challenge to the acquisition notifications and sought allotment of developed land. The petitioners contend that the said representations are not considered by the respondents. Therefore, they seek a direction to be issued to the respondents Nos.3 and 4 to consider their representations in the light of the orders passed by this Court referred supra. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners reiterated the above submissions and prays that a direction be issued to respondent Nos.3 and 4 to consider the representations of the petitioners. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent Nos.3 and 4 submitted that these petitions could be disposed of on similar lines as in W.P. Nos.10406/2016, 18849/2016, 4810/ 2021, 56533/2015, 48560/2017, 48295/2017. 5. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed off, directing the respondent Nos.3 and 4 to consider the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30296 WP No. 17710 of 2026 representations of the petitioners in the light of the order passed by this Court in W.P. Nos.10406/2016, 18849/2016, 4810/ 2021, 56533/2015, 48560/2017, 48295/2017. 6. As the petitioners have rushed to this Court even before the respondent Nos.3 and 4 could take a decision on their representations, the petitioners shall pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- each to the respondent Nos.3 and 4. 7. The representations of the petitioners shall be considered within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, subject to the petitioners paying the costs as ordered above. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE HJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28