Karnataka HC Directs Officials to Act on Upper Krishna Landowners’ Consent-Award Requests Under 2025 Order Within a Year of SLAO Appearance

A preliminary notification under Section 11(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (“2013 Act”) was issued on 13 September 2022 for lands proposed to be acquired for the Back Waters Upper Krishna Project.

The petitioners’ lands were among those proposed for acquisition.

Following the Government Order dated 9 October 2025, the petitioners submitted representations on 8 September 2026 seeking consent awards.

They relied on an earlier order in connected acquisition matters directing the authorities to extend the Government Order’s benefit by drawing consent awards.

The State submitted that no final notification had been issued within the period contemplated by Section 19(1), and that the preliminary notification had lapsed; it also argued that a consent award required a final notification.

The petitioners relied on an affidavit filed in pending contempt proceedings in which the Government had stated that it would issue a final notification and thereafter take steps toward consent awards.

Section 11(1) of the 2013 Act provides for publication of a preliminary notification of the proposed acquisition, while Section 19(1) concerns the final declaration and the time for issuing it; the State relied on the statutory time limit in contending that the 2022 preliminary notification had lapsed.

Section 93(2) was identified as a possible statutory remedy concerning damages or otherwise if an order or endorsement was issued against the petitioners’ request.

The Court also applied the Government Order dated 9 October 2025 as the basis for the requested benefit, directing action under it only “in accordance with law”.

No precedent was cited.

The Court considered the petitioners’ representations, the earlier order granting the Government Order’s benefit in connected matters, and the Government affidavit concerning further steps toward final notification and consent awards.

Although the State argued that the preliminary notification had lapsed and a consent award could not be made without a final notification, the Court did not conclusively decide that the notification remained operative or order that a final notification be issued.

Instead, it directed the Government to act on the representations and extend the Government Order’s benefit if not already granted, subject to the law and the SLAO’s consideration of the petitioners’ documents.

The petitioners were given liberty to appear before the concerned SLAO on 20 November 2026 with relevant documents, and the SLAO was directed to take action under the Government Order dated 9 October 2025, in accordance with law, within one year from the petitioners’ first appearance.

If unable to comply within that period, the State may seek an extension for valid reasons; if an adverse order or endorsement is issued, the petitioners may pursue available remedies, including under Section 93(2) of the 2013 Act.