ERANNA HIREGOUD vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11334
WP No. 203545 of 2026
C/W WP No. 202805 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030090492026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
TH
DATED THIS THE 14 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
WRIT PETITION NO. 203545 OF 2026 (LA-KIADB)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO. 202805 OF 2026 (LA-KIADB)
IN WP No. 203545/2026
BETWEEN:
SRI. ERANNA HIREGOUD
S/O GURULINGAPPA HIREGOUD
AGED ABOUT 56
RESIDENT OF NANDUR (K) VILLAGE
KALABURAGI TALUK
KALABURAGI DISTRICT
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI SHARAN N MAJAGE,
SMT. NAYANTARA B. G. AND
SRI ANNARAYA M. PATIL, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BANGALORE-560001
2.
KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS
DEVELOPMENT BOARD
REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER
Digitally signed
by SWETA
KULKARNI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11334
WP No. 203545 of 2026
C/W WP No. 202805 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030090492026
KHANIJA BHAVANA, RACE COURSE ROAD
BENGALURU-560001
3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-2
KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS
DEVELOPMENT BOARD
REGIONAL OFFICE, KAPNOOR INDUSTRIAL AREA
HUMNABAD ROAD
KALABURAGI-585104
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, AGA FOR R1;
SRI KARTHIK I PATIL, ADV. FOR R2 AND R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO 1)
ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE
WRIT, ORDER, OR DIRECTION, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED
GENERAL AWARD BEARING NO. DATED :
PÉLJr©/¨sÀƸÁé/PÀ/01/2024-25
08-08-2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 PRODUCED AT
ANNEXURE-N, AS BEING ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND WITHOUT
JURISDICTION; II) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY
OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER, OR DIRECTION,
DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3 TO REDETERMINE
AND PASS A FRESH AWARD FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE
PETITIONER’S LANDS BEARING SY.NO.171/1 (6 ACRES 18
GUNTAS) AND SY.NO.171/2 (4 ACRES) OF NANDUR-K
VILLAGE, KALABURAGI, STRICTLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
PRINCIPLES OF COMPENSATION AND OTHER BENEFITS AS
MANDATED UNDER THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND
TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND
RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013, IN LIGHT OF THE LAW LAID DOWN
IN JOHN NEIL VIANNEY AND ANR. VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA
AND ORS. (W.P.NO.777/2026) - ANNEXURE-P AND
FRANCISCAN SERVICE SOCIETY OF BANGALORE V. KIADB AND
ORS. (SLP (C) NO. 20347 OF 2022)- ANNEXURE-Q, WITHIN A
TIME-FRAME TO BE STIPULATED BY THIS COURT; III) ISSUE A
FURTHER WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS
TO FORTHWITH DISBURSE THE COMPENSATION SO
DETERMINED ALONG WITH ALL STATUTORY BENEFITS,
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11334
WP No. 203545 of 2026
C/W WP No. 202805 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030090492026
INCLUDING INTEREST, FROM THE DATE OF DISPOSSESSION
TILL THE DATE OF ACTUAL PAYMENT; IV) GRANT SUCH OTHER
AND FURTHER RELIEFS AS THIS COURT MAY DEEM FIT AND
PROPER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE,
INCLUDING THE COSTS OF THIS PETITION.
IN WP NO. 202805/2026
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. PUSHPALATHA
W/O. LATE SRIRANG JINDE
AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS
2.
MR. RAHUL
S/O.LATE SRIRANG JINDE
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
3. MRS. RISHIRAJ
S/O. LATE SRIRANG JINDE
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
PETITIONER NO.1 TO 3
RESIDING AT. H.NO.10-197
S.B.TEMPLE ROAD, SUBHASH CHOWK
BRAHMPUR, KALABURAGI-585101
4. MRS. RUPALI
LATE. SRIRANG JINDE
W/O. MANOHAR
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
RESIDING AT H.NO. 4-3-75
DULPETH, NARAYANPETHABHANGPURA
MAHABOOBNAGAR
(ANDHRA PRADESH)-509001
5. MRS. PALLAVI
D/O. LATE SRIRANGJINDE
W/O.GURURAJ MANKAR
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11334
WP No. 203545 of 2026
C/W WP No. 202805 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030090492026
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
RESIDING AT
NEAR OLD NANDI GODAM
ALMEL, VIJAYAPURA-586101
6. MRS. VAISHALI
D/O. LATE SRIRANG JINDE
W/O. ANIL KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
RESIDING AT. H.NO. 8-10-325/1
AKKAMAHADEVI COLONY
BIDAR-585 401.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SHARAN N MAJAGE., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BANGALORE-560001
2. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS
DEVELOPMENT BOARD
REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER
KHANIJA BHAVANA, RACE COURSE ROAD
BENGALURU-560001
3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-2
KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS
DEVELOPMENT BOARD, REGIONAL OFFICE
KAPNOOR INDUSTRIAL AREA
HUMNABAD ROAD, KALABURAGI-585104.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, AGA FOR R1;
SRI.A.M.NAGARAL ADV., FOR R2 AND R3)
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11334
WP No. 203545 of 2026
C/W WP No. 202805 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030090492026
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO I)
ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER
APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER, OR DIRECTION, QUASHING
THE IMPUGNED GENERAL AWARD BEARING NO.KIADB/
BHU SWA/KA01/24-25 DATED 08.08.2025 PASSED BY THE
RESPONDENT NO.3 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-H AS BEING
ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION, AS IT
DETERMINES COMPENSATION UNDER THE OLD
PROVISIONS AND NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RIGHT
TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND
ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT
2013; II) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER
APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, DIRECTING
THE RESPONDENTS TO PASS A FRESH AWARD FOR THE
ACQUISITION OF THE SUBJECT LANDS BEARING SURVEY
NO’S. 173/1, 173/8, 173/9, 173/10, 173/11 AND 173/12
OF NANDUR-K VILLAGE, KALABURAGI BY DETERMINING
THE COMPENSATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
PROVISIONS OF THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND
TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION
AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013 WITH AMENDED SECTION
30 OF THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT
ACT, 1966 AND TO PAY THE SAME TO THE PETITIONERS
WITH ALL STATUTORY BENEFITS, INCLUDING INTEREST
WITHIN A TIME-FRAME TO BE STIPULATED BY THIS COURT
AS PER RATIO LAID IN M/S SRI BALAJI CORPORATE
SERVICES V. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS (WP
NO.43206/2018); III) PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER OR
ORDERS AS THIS COURT MAY DEEM FIT AND PROPER IN
THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE,
INCLUDING AN AWARD OF COSTS, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN
AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11334
WP No. 203545 of 2026
C/W WP No. 202805 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030090492026
ORAL ORDER
In Writ Petition No.203545/2026, the petitioner is seeking
for the following prayers:
“1) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other
appropriate writ, order, or direction, quashing the
impugned General Award bearing
No. dated : 08-08-2025
PÉLJr©/¨sÀƸÁé/PÀ/01/2024-25
passed by the respondent No.3 produced at
Annexure-N, as being illegal, arbitrary and without
jurisdiction;
ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order, or direction, directing the
respondent Nos.2 and 3 to redetermine and pass a
fresh award for the acquisition of the petitioner’s
lands bearing Sy.No.171/1 (6 acres 18 guntas) and
Sy.No.171/2 (4 acres) of Nandur-K village,
Kalaburagi, strictly in accordance with the principles
of compensation and other benefits as mandated
under the Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013, in light of the law laid down
in John Neil Vianney and Anr. vs. State of
Karnataka and Ors. (W.P.No.777/2026) - Annexure-
P and Franciscan Service Society of Bangalore v.
KIADB and Ors. (SLP (C) No. 20347 of 2022)-
Annexure-Q, within a time-frame to be stipulated by
this court;
iii) Issue a further writ of mandamus directing the
respondents to forthwith disburse the compensation
so determined along with all statutory benefits,
including interest, from the date of dispossession till
the date of actual payment;
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11334
WP No. 203545 of 2026
C/W WP No. 202805 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030090492026
iv) Grant such other and further reliefs as this court
may deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case, including the costs of this
petition.”
In Writ Petition No.202805/2026, the petitioner is seeking
for the following prayers:
i) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate
writ, order, or direction, quashing the impugned
general award bearing no.KIADB/ BHU
SWA/KA01/24-25 dated 08.08.2025 passed by the
respondent no.3 produced at Annexure-H as being
illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction, as it
determines compensation under the old provisions
and not in accordance with the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013;
ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the
respondents to pass a fresh award for the acquisition
of the subject lands bearing survey no’s. 173/1,
173/8, 173/9, 173/10, 173/11 and 173/12 of
Nandur-K village, Kalaburagi by determining the
compensation in accordance with the provisions of
the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in
land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act,
2013 with amended Section 30 of the Karnataka
Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 and to pay
the same to the petitioners with all statutory
benefits, including interest within a time-frame to be
stipulated by this court as per ratio laid in M/s Sri
Balaji Corporate Services v. Union of India and
others (WP NO.43206/2018);
iii) Pass such other order or orders as this court may
deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11334
WP No. 203545 of 2026
C/W WP No. 202805 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030090492026
the case, including an award of costs, in the interest
of justice and equity.
2. With the consent of the learned counsel appearing
on both sides, these writ petitions are clubbed together, heard
together and common order is passed.
3. Smt. Nayantara B.G. and Sri Sharan N. Majage,
learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that the
impugned award was passed after the amendment to Section
30 of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966
(hereinafter referred to as the ‘KIAD Act’ for short). Hence, the
award is required to be passed under the provisions of the
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (‘the
Act, 2013’ for short). In support of their contentions, they
placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the case of SRI
1
RAJASHEKHAR V. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS
and submit that the present writ petitions may be allowed in
terms of the same.
1
W.P.No.203892/2026 Dt:24.09.2026
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11334
WP No. 203545 of 2026
C/W WP No. 202805 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030090492026
4. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing
for respondent No.1 and learned counsel appearing for
respondent Nos.2 and 3 - KIADB submit that the amendment to
Section 30 of the KIAD Act has to be construed with reference
to the date of the preliminary notification and in the case on
hand, the preliminary notification is dated 09.12.2020 and final
notification is dated 23.11.2022. Hence, the passing of the
award by the KIADB under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (‘LA
Act’ for short) is just and correct and does not call for any
interference by this Court. Hence, they seek to dismiss the writ
petitions.
5. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners, learned Additional Government
Advocate appearing for respondent No.1, learned counsel
appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 – KIADB and
meticulously perused the material placed on record.
6. In the case on hand, admittedly the preliminary
notification was issued on 09.12.2020, final notification was
issued on 23.11.2022 and award came to be passed on
08.08.2025. The issuance of final notification and passing of an
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11334
WP No. 203545 of 2026
C/W WP No. 202805 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030090492026
award by the Land Acquisition Officer to the subject land in
question is admittedly after amendment to the provisions of the
KIAD Act.
7. This Court in the case of SRI RAJASHEKHAR,
referred supra considered the similar issue and held as under:
“6. It is not in dispute that various extents of land
belonging to the petitioner were acquired by the
respondent - State by issuing a preliminary notification
under Section 28(1) of the KAID Act on 09.12.2020 and
a final notification/declaration under Section 28(4) of the
KIAD Act on 23.11.2022. It is to be noticed that the
SLAO, KIADB, passed the general award on 26.05.2026.
7. Admittedly, the aforesaid award was passed after
substitution of Section 30 to the KIAD Act. It is to be
noticed that Section 30 of the KIAD Act was substituted
by Act No.20/2020, with effect from 05.04.2022.
Section 30 of the KIAD Act reads as under:
“ 30. Application of Central Act 30 of
2013.- The Sections 23, 23-A, 26, 27, 28, 29,
30, 64, 65, 69, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79,
80, 96 and Schedule 1 of the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement
Act, 2013 (Central Act 30 of 2013) shall for
the purpose be deemed to form part of this
Act in the same manner as if they were re-
enacted in the body thereof in respect of lands
acquired under this Chapter.”
8. The effect of the aforesaid substitution is that the
aforesaid provisions of the Act, 2013 apply to
acquisitions made under the KIAD Act with effect from
05.04.2022.
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11334
WP No. 203545 of 2026
C/W WP No. 202805 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030090492026
9. When things stood thus, the passing of the general
award by the KIADB under the LA Act is without
jurisdiction and illegal, as on the date of passing of the
award, the LA Act was not in force. The same view has
been taken by the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of
SMT. ANITHA, referred supra, at paragraph No.51,
which reads as under:
“ 51. As far as the argument of Mr.Patil that the
provisions of the 2013 Act would have to be
applied for awarding compensation is concerned,
it cannot be in dispute that Section 30 was
substituted in its entirety prior to 05.04.2022. The
KIADB, therefore, should not have awarded
compensation under the 1894 Act. Since the
award in the instant case has been passed after
05.04.2022, i.e., on 05.02.2024 and approved on
08.02.2024 under the 1894 Act, the general
awards cannot be sustained (though there is no
specific prayer made in the present petition) and
the same are, accordingly, quashed .””
8. In view of the preceding analysis, I am of the
considered view that the respondent – authority ought not to
have passed the award under the repealed law. The
respondent – authority are required to pass fresh award under
the provisions of the Act, 2013 to the land in question. Hence,
I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
i) The writ petitions are allowed .
ii) The General Awards dated 08.08.2025 at
Annexure-N and H to the writ petitions
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11334
WP No. 203545 of 2026
C/W WP No. 202805 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030090492026
respectively, passed by the Special Land
Acquisition Officer, KIADB are set aside.
iii) The Land Acquisition Officer, KIADB is directed
to pass a fresh award in accordance with the
provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation
and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013,
insofar as subject lands, within a period of
three(3) months from the date of receipt of a
certified copy of this order.
iv) If any amount has been deposited or released
in favour of the petitioner-land loser, the same
shall be adjusted towards the fresh award to be
passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, KIADB.
No order as to costs.
Sd/-
(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)
JUDGE
RV
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4