KIADB Must Consider Requests for Developed Land in Lieu of Compensation Under the 2021 Government Order.

The petitioners claimed ownership of 7 acres 34 guntas in Sy. No. 91, Kempanadodderi Village, acquired for an industrial layout under the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (KIAD Act).

The Special Land Acquisition Officer passed a general award on 30 November 2013 and deposited compensation before the Reference Court.

The petitioners sought to quash the award and obtain developed land under the State Government Order dated 23 February 2021, which provided for allotment of 10,781 sq. ft. of developed land per acre in lieu of monetary compensation.

They argued that they had not been given an opportunity to reach an agreement on compensation under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act before the general award was passed.

The KIADB submitted that it would consider appropriate representations in accordance with law.

1. Whether the 30 November 2013 general award should be quashed in light of the petitioners’ claim that no opportunity was given to agree on compensation under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act.

2. Whether the petitioners could seek consideration for allotment of 10,781 sq. ft. of developed land per acre under the Government Order dated 23 February 2021.

Sections 1(3), 3(1), 28(1) and 28(4) of the KIAD Act provide the statutory framework for acquisition of land for industrial development.

Under Section 29(2), the parties may agree on compensation; where no agreement is reached, Section 29(3) provides for an award by the competent officer.

The Government Order dated 23 February 2021 provides for allotment of 10,781 sq. ft. of developed industrial land per acre in lieu of monetary compensation, subject to consideration in accordance with law.

The Court did not set out a broader statutory test or make a definitive ruling on entitlement to developed land.

The Court recorded the petitioners’ contention that they had not been afforded an opportunity to agree on compensation before the general award was made, and noted the KIADB’s position that it would consider appropriate representations.

The KIADB did not dispute the Government Order providing for developed land in lieu of monetary compensation.

Rather than direct immediate allotment, the Court quashed the award and allowed the petitioners to submit fresh representations for consideration under the Government Order and applicable law.

The petitioners were permitted to submit representations within 30 days of receiving a certified copy of the order, expressing consent to receive 10,781 sq. ft. of developed land per acre in lieu of monetary compensation.

The KIADB must decide the representations within eight weeks of their submission.

If no consensus is reached or objections remain unresolved, the respondents may take further action in accordance with law and after notifying the petitioners.