SRI ANIL GUPTHA vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53616
WP No. 30237 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010663082026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 28 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO. 30237 OF 2026 (LA-KIADB)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. ANIL GUPTHA
S/O. INDRASEN GUPTHA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.802/4,
GURU KRUPA APARTMENT,
ST
NO.3, 1 BLOCK,
NEAR SPECIALIST HOSPITAL,
KALYAN NAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560043
2. SMT. RITU GUPTHA
W/O. ANIL GUPTHA,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.802/4,
GURU KRUPA APARTMENT,
ST
NO.3, 1 BLOCK,
NEAR SPECIALIST HOSPITAL,
KALYAN NAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560043
…PETITIONERS
Digitally
signed by
HEMALATHA
J
Location:
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA
(BY SMT. LEELA P. DEVADIGA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES,
VIKASA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU - 560001.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53616
WP No. 30237 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010663082026
KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD,
ST
(K-RIDE), 1 FLOOR,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560001.
3. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
K-RIDE, KRDC BUILDING,
ST
1 FLOOR, OPPOSITE ORION MALL,
BENGALURU-560001.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.J.ESHWARAPPA, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE
FOR RESPONDENT NO.1;
SRI. H.L.PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND
3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE GENERAL
ND
AWARD PASSED BY THE 2 RESPONDENT, INSOFAR AS IT RELATES
TO THE PETITIONERS' PROPERTY MEASURING 33.15 SQ.MTRS. IN
SY.NO.109/2 OF HORAMAVU VILLAGE, KRISHNARAJAPURA HOBLI,
BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BEARING ID NO.C4/R/26/2/HORAMAVU/4,
PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-B, VIDE BEARING
NO.KIADB/KRIDE/BOOSWA AND ETC.
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
certiorari to quash the general award bearing
No. dated Nil passed by the
PÉLJr©/PÉDgïLrE/¨sÀƸÁé/ /2025-26
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53616
WP No. 30237 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010663082026
respondent No.2 in respect of the land in Sy.Nos.109/2,
measuring to an extent of 33.15 sq.mtrs., situate at Horamavu
Village, Krishnarajapura Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk. They have
also sought for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the
consequential reference made under Section 77(2) of the Right
to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (henceforth referred
to as 'the Act, 2013') in LAC No.21/2026. They have also
sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the
respondent No.2 to consider their case under Section 29(2) of
the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966
(henceforth referred to as 'the KIAD Act') and consequently
direct the respondent No.2 to release and disburse the
compensation together with all statutory benefits.
2. (i) The petitioners claim that they are the joint
owners of property bearing Sy.No.109/2 situate at Horamavu
Village, Krishnarajapura Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk. They
contend that respondent authority proposed to acquire land in
Sy.No.109/2 measuring 33.15 square meters, for formation of
Corridor-4 of the Bengaluru Sub-Urban Railway Project for the
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53616
WP No. 30237 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010663082026
benefit of Rail Infrastructure Development Company
(Karnataka) Limited (K-RIDE) vide preliminary notification
dated 05.08.2025 under Section 28(1) of the KIAD Act which
was published in the official gazette on 07.08.2025, followed by
a final notification dated 01.01.2026 issued under Section
28(4) of the KIAD Act which was published in the official
gazette on 02.01.2026. The petitioners contend that though
acquisition proceedings directly affected their right in the
acquired property, no effective notice was served upon them to
afford them a reasonable opportunity to appear before the
respondent No.2 and submit necessary documents to establish
their right, title or claim over the acquired property.
(ii) Thereafter, they contend that the respondent No.2
passed a general award (Annexure-B) dated Nil determining
compensation at a meagre sum and it was ordered to be
deposited before the Civil Court as the petitioners did not
produce documents to establish their title over the acquired
property. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners have sought
quashing of the general award (Annexure-B) and the LAC
proceedings initiated under section 77(2) of the Act, 2013 in
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53616
WP No. 30237 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010663082026
LAC No.21/2026 and further prayed for a direction to
respondent No.2 to determine compensation payable in respect
of the acquired property in terms of Section 29(2) of the KIAD
Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners reiterated the
above contentions and submits that the general award
(Annexure-B) is passed and the consequential reference is
made without affording the petitioners a reasonable and
effective opportunity to put forth their claim and produce the
documents to establish their right, title and interest over the
acquired property. He submits that if reasonable opportunity is
given, the petitioners shall produce necessary documents to
establish their right, title and interest over the acquired
property and seeks that a direction be issued to respondent
No.2 to reconsider and determine the compensation payable to
the petitioners under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act.
4. The learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3
does not dispute the fact that the petitioners did not challenge
the acquisition notifications. He also does not dispute the fact
that a general award was passed determining the compensation
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53616
WP No. 30237 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010663082026
payable in respect of the acquired property. He further does not
dispute the fact that the notice was not served upon the
petitioners to demonstrate their title over the acquired
property, however he submits that if the petitioners file
appropriate application and produce requisite documents
demonstrating their claim over the acquired property, the same
shall be considered in accordance with law.
5. In view of the above submission, following order is
passed:
ORDER
allowed
i. This writ petition is ;
ii. The impugned general award bearing
No. dated Nil (Annexure-B)
PÉLJr©/PÉDgïLrE/¨sÀƸÁé/ /2025-26
passed by the respondent No.2 in so far as the petitioners'
property and the reference made under section 77(2) of
the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 in
LAC No.21/2026, are concerned are quashed.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53616
WP No. 30237 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010663082026
iii. The petitioners are granted liberty to submit
representation to respondent No.2 expressing their
consent for an award within a period of thirty days from
the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and
they shall also produce necessary documents to
demonstrate their right, title and interest over the
acquired property.
iv. The respondent No.2 is directed to consider the case of
the petitioners and pass a consent award as provided
under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act, within a period of
three months from the date of submission of the
representation by the petitioners. Amount, if any,
deposited by respondent No.2 before the competent Civil
Court pursuant to the general award (Annexure-B) is
permitted to be withdrawn.
v. It is made clear that in the event if there is no consensus
or there is any dispute regarding the entitlement and
apportionment of the award or there is any unresolved
objections, the general award No.
PÉLJr©/PÉDgïLrE/¨sÀƸÁé/
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53616
WP No. 30237 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010663082026
dated Nil passed by the respondent No.2 would
/2025-26
stand revived and respondent No.2 shall redeposit the
compensation before the competent Civil Court and the
petitioners would be entitled to seek enhancement of the
compensation in accordance with law.
6. The learned Additional Government Advocate for
respondent No.1 and Sri. H.L.Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel
for respondent Nos.2 and 3 are permitted to file memo of
appearance within 10 days.
Sd/-
(R. NATARAJ)
JUDGE
HJ
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37