Karnataka HC Gives Officials 3 Months To Consider Farmer’s Compensation Claim Over 39 Guntas Used For Railway Project

In brief

The question

Whether the respondents should be directed to determine and pay the petitioner compensation and statutory benefits for the land allegedly utilized for the railway project.

The court held

The writ petition was allowed.

It also directed

Respondents 2 to 6 were directed to consider the petitioner’s legal notice dated 22 August 2026 and representation dated 18 September 2026 in accordance with law, and to complete that consideration within three months of receiving a copy of the order.

No order was made as to costs.

01Facts

The petitioner claimed to be the recorded owner and cultivator of land in Survey No. 292/*/2 at K. Nagaon Village, Chittapur Taluk.

pp. 4–5

He alleged that 0 acres, 39 guntas and 13 annas had been deducted from his holding for a railway infrastructure project without payment of compensation.

pp. 4–5

After issuing a legal notice dated 22 August 2026 and submitting a representation dated 18 September 2026 seeking compensation, he filed this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.

p. 2, 5

The State’s objections referred to a change in survey numbers during acquisition; the Court also noted an Assistant Commissioner’s order dated 2 September 2026.

p. 5

02Issues

i.Whether the respondents should be directed to determine and pay the petitioner compensation and statutory benefits for the land allegedly utilized for the railway project.

pp. 2–3

ii.Whether the respondents should be directed to conduct a joint survey and rectify the land records, or instead be directed to consider the petitioner’s representations regarding compensation.

pp. 2–3, 5–6

03Law Applied

The petition invoked the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, but the Court did not determine the Act’s application or decide the merits of the compensation claim.

pp. 2–3, 6

The operative principle was that the competent respondents must consider the petitioner’s representations in accordance with law.

04Reasoning

In light of the State’s position that survey numbers had changed during acquisition and the Assistant Commissioner’s order dated 2 September 2026, the Court considered it appropriate for the respondents to examine the petitioner’s grievance concerning compensation.

p. 5

It made no finding on ownership, the precise extent acquired, or entitlement to compensation, and did not grant the requested survey or record-rectification relief. Instead, it directed consideration of the representations on their merits and in accordance with law.

pp. 5–6