- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12582 WP No. 26988 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 26988 OF 2025 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN: 1. C. KRISHNAIAH AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, S/O.LATE CHIKKANNA 2. SMT. NAGAVENI, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, W/O.LATE N.RAMAIAH, BOTH ARE RESIDENT OF CHIKKANAPALYA, THYAMAGONDALU HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BANGALORE - 562 123. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. T.P. VIVEKANANDA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE DEPARTMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA, DR.B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12582 WP No. 26988 of 2025 NO.49, IV & V FLOORS, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001. 3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-1 KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD (KIADB) (BMICP) AND BENGALURU RURAL, NELAMANGALA, OFFICE SITUATED AT NO.14/3, ARAVINDA BHAVAN, 1ST FLOOR, BENGALURU - 560 001. 4. SMT. PUTTATHAYAMMA, W/O. LATE GANGACHARI, AGED ABOUT 94 YEARS, RESIDING AT VANAVARA, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, KARNATAKA - 561 203. 5. SMT. KAMALAMMA, D/O. LATE NINGAMMA AND LATE CHANNACHAR, W/O. LATE ALAGCHAR, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, RESIDING AT NEAR PARK, NEAR SUBRAMANYA SWAMY TEMPLE, KURIPALYA, TUMAKURU CITY, KARNATAKA - 572 101. 6. SMT. ASHWATHAMMA D/O. SMT. KAMALAMMA AND LATE ALAGACHAR, W/O. LATE GANGADHARACHAR, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT NEAR PARK, NEAR SUBRAMANYA SWAMY TEMPLE, KURIPALYA, TUMAKURU CITY, KARNATAKA - 572 101. 7. SMT. RUDRANAMMA D/O. KAMALAMMA AND LATE ALAGACHAR, W/O. LATE SHANKARACHAR, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12582 WP No. 26988 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, RESIDING AT THIGALARA BEEDI, UDRIGERE VILLAGE AND HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK AND DISTRICT, KARNATAKA - 572 140. 8. SMT. KALAMMAS D/O. RUDRANAMMA AND LATE SHANKARACHAR, W/O. SRI. LOKESH, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, RESIDING AT THIGALARA BEEDI, UDRIGERE VILLAGE AND HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK AND DISTRICT, KARNATAKA - 572 140. 9. SMT. SHRUTHI PRAVEEN, W/O. SRI. PRAVEEN K.J. AGED: MAJOR, RESIDING AT NO.96, SERPENTINE ROAD, OPPOSITE SBM, KUMARA PARK WEST, SESHADRIPURAM, BENGALURU - 560 002. 10. SMT. ASHA RANI @ ASHA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, D/O.SHANKARACHAR AND SMT. RUDRANAMMA, W/O.SRINIVASAMOORTHACHAR, R/O.THIGALARA BEEDI, URDIGERE VILLAGE AND HOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK & DISTRICT - 572 140. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.YOGESH D. NAIK, AGA FOR R1; SRI. VASANTH FOR R2 & R3; SRI. D.S. JAYARAJ FOR R10; VIDE ORDER DATED 04.11.2025 NOTICE TO R4 TO R9 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12582 WP No. 26988 of 2025 CERTIORARI TO REVIEW THE ORDER DTD. 04.12.2024 PASSED BY THIS HONBLE COURT IN W.P.NO.19400/2024 AT ANNEXURE - G AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed by the petitioners herein assailing the order dated 04.12.2024 in Writ Petition No.19400/2024 (Annexure - G) passed by this Court. 2. Heard Sri. T.P. Vivekananda, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri. Yogesh D. Naik, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 - State, Sri. Vasanth, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 - KIADB and Sri. D.S. Jayaraj, learned counsel for respondent No.10. 3. Sri. T.P. Vivekananda, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that the respondent No.10 herein has preferred - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12582 WP No. 26988 of 2025 W.P.No.19400/2024, without arraying the petitioners in the present writ petition as the parties and further, submitted that the claim made by respondent No.10 herein in W.P.No.19400/2024 pertains to the subject matter of the property in O.S.No.542/2021 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Nelamangala in which, respondent No.10 is claiming right over the property in question and further claim of the respondent No.10 which has been already rejected by the competent revenue Court in the proceedings under Section 77A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 and in that view of the matter, it is contended that respondent No.10 has preferred W.P.No.19400/2024 seeking relief as not to release or disburse the compensation amount to anyone in view of acquisition of item No.2 of the schedule property therein and therefore, learned counsel submitted that, it is a clear abuse of process of law by respondent No.10 and accordingly, sought for interference of this Court. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12582 WP No. 26988 of 2025 4. Per contra, Sri. D.S. Jayaraj, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.10 submitted that respondent No.10 has preferred O.S.No.542/2021 seeking relief of partition and separate possession in respect of the subject matter of the properties mentioned in the suit schedule properties. It is further submitted that the subject matter in the writ petition is also one of the suit properties in the suit. Therefore, in the event, if the release of the compensation is made by the respondent Nos.2 and 3 namely, KIADB, irreparable loss would be caused to respondent No.10. Hence, learned counsel sought to justify the impugned order dated 04.12.2024 in W.P.No.19400/2024 (Annexure - G). 5. It is also submitted by learned counsel appearing for respondent No.10 that the petitioners herein have been impleaded in O.S.No.542/2021 and their impleading application came to be allowed on 22.01.2026. 6. Having heard the learned counsels for the parties, I am of the opinion that as the petitioners herein - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12582 WP No. 26988 of 2025 in the present writ petition seeking rights over the properties in question, as per the proceedings in LRF (NML)184/98-99 and LRF (GRG) 8/99-2000 (Annexure - D), the order dated 04.12.2024 passed by this Court at Annexure - G requires to be set aside and W.P.No.19400/2024 has to be restored to file. 6. In that view of the matter, taking into consideration the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for petitioners as well as the contesting respondents herein, who are parties to the suit in O.S.No.542/2021, I find force in the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that the order dated 04.12.2024 in W.P.No.19400/2024 is required to be recalled. Accordingly, I pass the following; ORDER i) Writ Petition is allowed. ii) Order dated 04.12.2024 in Writ Petition No.19400/2024 is hereby set aside and - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12582 WP No. 26988 of 2025 Writ Petition No.19400/2024 is restored on file. iii) It is open for the petitioners herein to implead in Writ Petition No.19400/2024, if so desires. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE KLV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48