01Facts
The petitioners sought completion of land-acquisition proceedings concerning their lands under the notification dated 7 October 2022, and sought a consent award extending the benefit of the Government Order dated 9 October 2025, as allegedly extended to similarly situated landowners.
pp. 7–8 · ¶ 3Alternatively, they sought an award under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
pp. 7–8 · ¶ 3The State submitted that no final notification had been issued, although a joint measurement had been conducted, and requested that the authorities be directed to consider the petitioners’ representation without an outer time limit.
pp. 8–9 · ¶ 5The Court treated the matter as covered by earlier decisions concerning the same issue.
pp. 8–11 · ¶ 2, 4–602Issues
i.1. Whether the petitioners were entitled to a consent award for their lands, extending the benefit of the Government Order dated 9 October 2025.
pp. 7–8 · ¶ 3 · p. 11 · ¶ 8ii.2. Whether the Special Land Acquisition Officer should be directed to complete the further acquisition proceedings within a specified period.
pp. 8–9 · ¶ 5 · p. 12 · ¶ 9–1003Law Applied
Under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the High Court may issue appropriate directions to public authorities in the exercise of its writ jurisdiction.
pp. 9–11 · ¶ 4–6The Court applied the Government Order dated 9 October 2025, directing that its benefit be extended through a consent award, and followed the approach in the cited coordinate-bench decisions, including W.P. Nos. 104402 and 104112 of 2026 and the earlier orders referred to therein.
pp. 9–11 · ¶ 4–6Although the petitioners pleaded the 2013 Act as an alternative basis for relief, the Court did not independently analyse or decide that statutory claim.
pp. 7–8 · ¶ 3Provisions in the judgment · 1 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 Section 19
04Reasoning
The Court found the dispute identical to matters already decided by coordinate benches and therefore applied the same relief rather than separately determining the alternative statutory claim.
pp. 11–12 · ¶ 7–8It directed the Special Land Acquisition Officer to pass a consent award for the petitioners’ lands under the 7 October 2022 notification, extending the benefit of the 9 October 2025 Government Order.
pp. 11–12 · ¶ 7–8The Court also required the petitioners to appear before the officer and set a one-year outer limit for completing further proceedings from the date of their first appearance.
p. 12 · ¶ 9–1005Holding
The writ petition was partly allowed.
pp. 11–12 · ¶ 7–10Respondent No. 7, the Special Land Acquisition Officer, was directed to pass a consent award concerning the petitioners’ lands under the notification dated 7 October 2022, with the benefit of the Government Order dated 9 October 2025.
pp. 11–12 · ¶ 7–10The petitioners were directed to appear before the officer on 31 October 2026 at 11:00 a.m., and the officer was directed to complete further proceedings in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible and within one year of the first appearance.
pp. 11–12 · ¶ 7–10Original Court PDF
PRAKASHGOUDA S/O BASANGOUDA NYAMAGOUDARvsTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
