- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1020 WP No. 101478 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 101478 OF 2025 (LA-RES) BETWEEN: MAHANTAPPA S/O. GURULINGAPPA SOMANKATTI AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. MUSHIGERI, TQ. AND DIST: GADAG-582211. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHASHANK S.HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL LAND ACQUISION OFFICER, COMPETENT AUTHORITY, BANAPUR-GADDANAKERI SECTION (NH-367), TQ. AND DIST: GADAG-582101. 2. NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA G-5 & 6, SECTOR-10, DWARKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEEN K.UPPAR, AGA FOR R1; SRI. B.P.MATHAPATI AND SRI. S.G.HIREMATH, ADVOCATES FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO THIS HON’BLE COURT BE PLEASED TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE AWARD NOTICE DATED 30-09-2024 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT VIDE NO.LAQ/CR-42(4)/2021-22 IS ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-B AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA MANJANNA E Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2026.02.03 10:49:05 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1020 WP No. 101478 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the legality of the award Notice dated 30.09.2024 issued by the respondent No.1-Special Land Acquisition Officer (for short ‘SLAO’), whereby the compensation already determined under the general award dated 04.07.2023 has been unilaterally reduced by applying a multiplier factor of ‘1’ instead of ‘2’, thereby substantially diminishing the compensation payable to the petitioner. Brief Facts; 2. Lands including the petitioner's non-agricultural land, bearing Survey No.2/1+3, measuring 848.47 square meters situated at Mushigeri village, Gadag District, were required pursuant to a Central Gazette notification dated 21.07.2022, for the purpose of formation and development of NH-367 (Bhanapur-Gaddanakeri Section). Upon completion of acquisition proceedings, the respondent No.1- SLAO passed a General Award dated 04.07.2023, determining the market value at Rs.2,276/- per square - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1020 WP No. 101478 of 2025 meter and applying a multiplication factor of ‘2’ treating the land as falling within rural area. The total compensation payable was determined at Rs.79,46,048/-. Subsequently, by the impugned award notice dated 30.09.2024, the respondent No.1-SLAO reduced the compensation by applying a multiplication factor of ‘1’, thereby restricting the compensation to approximately Rs.40.83 lakhs without issuing any notice to the petitioner and without modifying or reviewing the original order in accordance with law. Aggrieved by the unilateral reduction of the compensation, the petitioner has approached this Court. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that once the General Award is passed determining compensation, the respondent No.1-SLAO becomes functus officio and has no jurisdiction to alter, vary or reduce the compensation except in a manner known to law. It is contended that the original award clearly records that Mushigeri village is situated about 18 kilometers from the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1020 WP No. 101478 of 2025 City limits, warranting application of multiplication factor ‘2’ as a statutory notification issued by the Government of India. It is admitted that the impugned award notice reducing the compensation has been issued without notice, without hearing and without assigning any reason, rendering the same arbitrary and violative principles of natural justice. It is contended that the action of respondent No.1-SLAO is contrary to the Government of India Gazette notification dated 09.02.2016 and the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (for short ‘MORTH’) Communications dated 08.08.2016, which mandate continued application of multiplication factor ‘2’ for rural areas even for acquisition under the National Highways Act, 1956 read with Right to Fair Compensation, and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short ‘Act, 2013’). 4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 contends that the acquisition was not - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1020 WP No. 101478 of 2025 undertaken by National Highway Authority of India and the project falls within the jurisdiction of the State Authorities. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent-State has sought to justify the reduction on the ground of an alleged error in applying the multiplication factor in the original award. 6. Having heard to the submissions of learned counsels on both sides, the point that arises for consideration is; “Whether the respondent No.1-SLAO, after having passed a General Award dated 04.07.2023, determining compensation by applying a multiplication factor of ‘2’ could subsequently reduce the compensation by issuing an award notice dated 30.09.2024, applying multiplication factor ‘1’ without notice to the landlord?” 7. It is not in dispute that the General Award dated 04.07.2023 was duly passed by the competent authority determining the compensation payable to the petitioner by applying a multiplication factor ‘2’. The award attained - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1020 WP No. 101478 of 2025 finality so far as discrimination of compensation by the SLAO is concerned. The Act, 2013 does not confer any power of review upon the Land Acquisition Officer. Except for correction of clerical or arithmetical errors under Section 33 of the Act, no authority is vested in the SLAO to alter or modify an award once passed. The application of a different multiplication factor resulting in violation of compensation is a substantive re-determination and not a clerical correction. Having passed the General Award dated 04.07.2023, the respondent No.1-SLAO became functus officio and lacked jurisdiction to issue the impugned award notice dated 30.09.2024. 8. Once a statutory authority passes an award under the land acquisition framework, it exhaust its jurisdiction insofar as determination of compensation is concerned and cannot reopen or alter the award except as expressly permitted by statute. In the present case, the respondent No.1-SLAO has not passed any review order nor - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1020 WP No. 101478 of 2025 is there any statutory provision pointed out which enables the SLAO to unilaterally reduce compensation after passing the award. The impugned action is sought to be justified merely by terming it as an ‘error’ an application of multiplication factor, which cannot be a ground to reopen a concluded award. The reduction of compensation from Rs.79,46,048/- to about 40.83 lakhs has been effected without issuing notice or affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Such an action is an ex-facie violation of the principles of natural justice. The original award records that the acquired land is situated in rural area, and the statutory notification of the Government of India clearly provide for application of multiplication factor ‘2’ in such cases. The respondent No.1-SLAO could not have by mere Award notice substituted the factor as ‘1’. This Court is of the considered view, that the impugned award notice dated 30.09.2024 is not only without jurisdiction, but suffers from arbitrariness and illegality warranting interference. Accordingly, this Court pass the following: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1020 WP No. 101478 of 2025 ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. ii. The award notice dated 30.09.2024 issued by the respondent No.1-Special Land Acquisition Officer, whereby the compensation payable to the petitioner was reduced by applying multiplication factor ‘1’ and restricting the compensation to about Rs.40,83,811/- is hereby quashed. iii. It is declared that the respondent No.1-SLAO having passed the General Award dated 04.07.2023 had become a functus officio and lacked jurisdiction to review, modify or alter the said award except to the limited extent permissible under Section 33 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, which does not apply to the present facts. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1020 WP No. 101478 of 2025 iv. The respondent No.1-Special Land Acquisition Officer is directed to disburse compensation to the petitioner strictly in terms of the General Award dated 04.07.2023 by applying the multiplication factor ‘2’ as originally determined along with all consequential statutory benefits within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. v. It is made clear that no further modification or reduction of the compensation shall be made by respondent No.2-authority except in accordance with law. vi. Liberty, if any, available to the parties under the statute is left open. Sd/- JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA AT/Ct:VH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22