- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33623 WP No. 3005 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 3005 OF 2025 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN: 1. SRI M BALAKRISHNA S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, 2. SRI. M. JANARDHANA S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, 3. SRI. NARAYANA KUMAR S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT BAGALUR VILLAGE JALA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK BANGALORE-562 149 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. NAGESH S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001 2. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD REPRESENTED BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OFFICE AT: NO.49 4TH AND 5TH FLOOR, EAST WING KHANIJA BHAVAN, Digitally signed by HEMALATHA J Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33623 WP No. 3005 of 2025 RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001 3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-2, THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD (KIADB) NO.14/3, C.F.C BUILDING MAHASHRI ARAVIND BHAVAN, 1ST FLOOR NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.POOJA M KOORSE, HCGP FOR R1; SRI.GOPAL V BILALMANE, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO CONSIDER THE WRITTEN REPRESENTATION DATED 25.11.2024 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE-A WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT. 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 respondent No.3 to consider their representation dated 25.11.2024 and award interest on the consent award that was paid. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33623 WP No. 3005 of 2025 2. The petitioners claim that they are the owners of survey No.198/739 (old Sy.No.198) of Mahadevakodigehalli, Jala Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk. The aforesaid land was acquired for various purposes in the year 2008 by the respondent No.1 for the purposes of the respondent No.2. This was challenged before this Court in W.P.No.45399-401/2013. All the writ petitions were allowed in terms of the order dated 18.09.2019. A general award was passed by the respondent No.3, which was questioned in W.P.No.17502/2023 on the ground that the petitioners were not given an opportunity to consent for an award under Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (henceforth referred to as 'the KIAD Act'). Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed in terms of the order dated 18.08.2023 and the respondent No.3 was directed to pass a consent award within three months. It is stated that though a consent award was passed on 18.11.2023, the compensation was paid on 14.01.2024. The petitioner therefore filed a representation dated 25.11.2024 seeking a reasonable interest at the rate of 12% per annum for the period 2018 to 2023. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33623 WP No. 3005 of 2025 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the said representation is not considered and therefore prays for a direction to respondent No.3 to consider the representation. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 however submits that the petitioners had consented for an award after the general award was quashed in W.P.No.17502/2023. He contends that a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in terms of the order dated 18.08.2023 granted three months’ time to the respondent Nos.2 and 3 to pass a consent award. He contends that after passing the consent award, compensation was paid to the petitioners on 14.01.2024. He therefore contends that there is a delay of only 45 days, assuming that the respondent Nos.2 and 3 had notice and knowledge of the order passed in W.P.No.17502/2023. He therefore prays that the delay, if any, be condoned. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33623 WP No. 3005 of 2025 6. The petitioner had challenged the general award and sought for a consent award in W.P.No.17502/2023. The said petition was allowed in terms of the order dated 18.08.2023 and the respondent No.3 was directed to pass a consent award within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. The respondent Nos.2 and3 were represented by counsel in W.P.No.17502/2023. Therefore, they were bound to know of the contents of the order. The respondent Nos.2 and 3 were thus expected to pass an award within three months. As a matter of fact, the respondent No.3 has passed an award within three months i.e. on 18.11.2023, but the payment of the compensation is delayed by nearly 45 days. 7. In that view of the matter, the respondent Nos.2 and 3 are bound to pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the consent award from 18.11.2023 till 14.01.2024. ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed; ii. The respondent Nos.2 and 3 are directed to pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum from - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33623 WP No. 3005 of 2025 18.11.2023 till the date of payment to the petitioners, by considering the representation of the petitioners dated 25.11.2024. This shall be complied within 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE BKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30