- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32403 WP No. 16875 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 16875 OF 2026 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN: SRI. K.N. VENUGOPAL REDDY S/O. LATE NARAYANA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.3, 9TH CROSS, KAVERAPPA LAYOUT, MARATHAHALLI COLONY, BENGALURU-560 037. REPRESENTED BY HIS SON AND POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SRI. MOHAN.V. AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, RESIDING AT VILLA NO.35, VASWANI WHISPERING PALMS, MARTHAHALLI OUTER RING ROAD, BENGALURU- 560 037. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. JANARDHANA G., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-2, KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, 1ST FLOOR, MAHARSHI ARVINDA BHAVAN, Digitally signed by HEMALATHA J Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32403 WP No. 16875 of 2026 14/3, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ADITYA DIWAKAR, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1; SRI. DILDAR SHIRALLI, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 TO 4) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO PASS THE AWARD UNDER SECTION 29 (2) OF THE KIADB ACT IN TERMS OF THIS HON'BLE COURT'S ORDER DATED 05.03.2021 PASSED IN WP NO. 4630/2021 VIDE ANNEXURE-D AND PAY THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT PAYABLE TO THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH INTEREST FOR THE DELAYED PERIOD. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct respondent No.2 to pass an award under Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966, (henceforth referred to as 'KIAD Act' for short) in terms of the order dated 05.03.2021 passed in W.P.No.4630/2021 and to pay compensation along with interest for the delayed period. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32403 WP No. 16875 of 2026 2. (i) The petitioner contends that he is the owner of 25½ guntas of land along with Kharab in Sy.No.146/1 of Amani Belandur Khane village, Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk. He contends that the said land was notified for acquisition by respondent No.2 for the formation of an industrial area in terms of the notification bearing No.C1 126 SPQ.2005 dated 19.12.2005 issued under Section 28(4) of the KIAD Act. He further contends that an award was passed on 05.02.2018 awarding a sum of Rs.62,63,934/-, possession of the land was taken and the compensation amount was deposited in LAC No.74/2018 under Sections 30 and 31(2) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. (ii) The petitioner claims that he and his sister-in-law had challenged the acquisition proceedings before this Court in W.P.No.3516/2015 and in W.P.No.19218/2013. However, the said writ petitions were withdrawn on 09.12.2019. The petitioner further contends that he and his sister-in-law challenged the award dated 05.02.2018 in W.P.No.4630/2021 and sought a direction to respondent No.2 to consider their request for passing an award under Section 29(2) of the KIAD - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32403 WP No. 16875 of 2026 Act. The said writ petition was allowed in terms of an order dated 05.03.2021 directing respondent No.2 to consider the case of the petitioner and pass an award under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy the said order. It was further held that in the event of any dispute regarding entitlement and apportionment of the compensation amount, the general award dated 05.02.2018 would revive. The respondent No.2 was permitted to withdraw the amount deposited in LAC No.74/2018 and accordingly, the amount was withdrawn on 21.08.2021. (iii) The petitioner contends that the dispute amongst the family members which was pending in O.S.No.3495/2009 was settled on 30.07.2009 and the same was brought to the notice of respondent No.2. However, respondent No.2 did not take any steps to pass a consent award under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act. The petitioner is therefore before this Court seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct respondent No.2 to pass a consent award. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32403 WP No. 16875 of 2026 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the above contentions and prayed that a direction be issued to respondent No.2 to pass a consent award. 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submitted that if there is no dispute between the petitioner and his family members, then respondent No.2 would consider passing a consent award as directed by this Court in W.P.No.4630/2021. 5. In view of the above submission of learned counsel for respondent No.2, the writ petition is allowed. If there are no other unresolved objections from any person interested, respondent No.2 is directed to pass an award under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act, as per the order dated 05.03.2021 passed in W.P.No.4630/2021 and pay the compensation amount along with all statutory benefits to the petitioner. This order shall be complied within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE HJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 89