IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT W.P.No.52298 OF 2018 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN 1. SMT. CHIKKALINGAMMA, W/O LATE THIMMAIAH, AGED 62 YEARS, 2. SMT GANGAMMA, W/O LATE RANGANNA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, 3. SMT MAMATHA, W/O GANGARAJU, D/O LATE RANGANNA, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, 4. CHIKKATHIMMAIAH, S/O LATE THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, 5. SRI NAGARAJU, S/O LATE THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, 6. SRI LAKSHMANA, S/O LATE THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, ALL ARE YALADADLU VILLAGE, KORA HOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 128. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI.NIJALINGAPPA M E, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 01.
2. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE & EXECUTIVE MEMBER, 4TH AND 5TH FLOORS, KHANIJA BHAVANA, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.
3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER NIMZ, KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, I FLOOR, MARUTHI TOWER, NEAR SIT MAIN GATE, TUMKUR - 572103. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. DILDAR SHIRALLI, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI.P.V. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE GENERAL AWARD DTD:20.12.2013 PASSED BY R-3 IN RESPECT OF BEARING SY NO.80/6 MEASURING 2 ACRE 27 GUNTAS, OF YALADADLU VILLAGE, KORA HOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT BELONGING TO PETITIONER IS CONCERNED, WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R The learned counsel for the Petitioners asserts and the learned Panel Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3, as also the learned HCGP for the 1st respondent State do not much dispute that the subject matter of this Writ Petition is akin to the one in cognate W.P.Nos.22311-22316/2016 (LA-KIADB) covered by the judgment of this Court dated 06.09.2016 rendered by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The operative portion of the judgment at Paras 4 & 5 reads as under:
“4. In an identical case in W.P.No.6198/2015 disposed of on 25.8.2015 (between SMT.NINGAMMA VS. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS), this Court has set aside the general award and permitted the parties to receive the compensation under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act. It has been held as under:
“Petitioner is assailing the General Award dated 30th December 2013, Annexure- A, of the 3rd respondent-Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (for short ‘KIADB’) insofar as it relates to 1 acre 39 guntas in Sy.No.444 of Cheeluru village, Maralavadi Hobli, Kanakapura Taluk, Ramanagara District, on the premise that her claim for determination of compensation ought to be by way of an agreement under Sub-section (2) of Section 29 of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (for short ‘KIAD Act’) since willing to the enter into an agreement after having obtained a compromise decree dated 6.12.2014 in O.S.126/2013 whereunder the property in question is declared to be the absolute property of the petitioner.
2. Sub-section (2) of Section 29 of the ‘KIAD Act’ provides for determination of compensation by an agreement and in the light of the compromise decree whereunder, the property in question has fallen to the exclusive share of the petitioner, is entitled to such a consideration, since it is stated that by such an agreement, petitioner would be entitled to a better price as compensation instead of determination under a general award, while acquisition proceeding would attain a finality disentitling petitioner to challenge the same in this petition. In the circumstances, there is a need to interfere with General Award Annexure-A insofar as it relates to petitioner’s land.
3. In the result, this petition is allowed. General Award Annexure-A insofar as it relates to petitioner is concerned is quashed. A direction shall ensue to respondent-KIADB to consider the case of the petitioner for determination of compensation by way of an agreement under Section 29(2) of the ‘KIAD Act’ to be complied with as expeditiously as possible within an outer limit of 31st October 2015. It is made clear that this order is applicable only if there is any dispute to title in the immovable property acquired and if there is one, the General Award in respect of petitioner is concerned shall stand restored until the dispute is resolved.”
5. For the reasons stated in the aforesaid order, the general award at Annexure ‘C’ dated 20.12.2013 in respect of the aforesaid survey numbers is hereby quashed. The 3rd respondent is directed to consider the case of the petitioners for determination of compensation in terms of Section 29(2) of KIAD Act. Compliance within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Respondent No.3 is permitted to withdraw the amount in deposit in the Civil Court. Writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. No costs.”
In view of the above, this Writ Petition succeeds in part; a Writ of Certiorari issues quashing the impugned General Award bearing No.KIADB:L.A.Q:2013-14 dated 20.12.2013 passed by the 3rd respondent in respect of the petition lands. The Writ Petition is disposed off in terms of the aforesaid judgment.
Costs made easy.
Sd/- JUDGE cbc