Karnataka High Court
P Radhakrishna Shenoy vs The Special Deputy Commissioner on 12 February, 2025
Author: M.G.S. Kamal
Bench: M.G.S. Kamal
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:6367
WP No. 48010 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
WRIT PETITION NO. 48010 OF 2014 (LA-KIADB)
BETWEEN:
P RADHAKRISHNA SHENOY
S/O LATE ANANDA SHENOY
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS
HOUSE NO.2-1-82/A-3
A K ROAD, GUNDIBAIL
POST KUNJIBETTU-576 102
UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. S K ACHARYA.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
KIADB, 14/3, 2ND FLOOR
RASHTHROTHANA PARISHAT BUILDING
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD
BANGALORE-560 001.
Digitally signed by
SUMA B N
Location: High
Court of 2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
Karnataka
KIADB, ZONAL OFFICE
BAIKAMPADY INDUSTRIAL AREA
MANGALORE-575 011.
3. UDUPI POWER CORPORATION LTD
NO.202, PRESTIGE OPAL
2ND FLOOR, 146, INFANTRY ROAD
BANGALORE-560 001
REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR.
(TECHNICAL)
4. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:6367
WP No. 48010 of 2014
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
M.S. BUILDING
BANGALORE -560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.B PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2;
SMT. RAJESWARA P.N.,ADVOCATE FOR R3;
SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF CONSITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
RESPONDENTS TO PAY THE REVISED/ENCHANCED
COMPENSATION AMOUNT TO THE PETITIONER IN SO FAR AS
THE SCHEDULE LAND BELONG TO THE PETITIONER IS
CONERNED AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
ORAL ORDER
Petitioner claiming to be the erstwhile owner of the land measuring 1 acre 66 cents, situated at Thenka village, Udupi Taluk and District which was acquired by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 for power project of the respondent No.3, is before this Court alleging discrimination in payment of compensation.
2. Admitted facts are that upon acquisition of the land as above in the proceedings determining the compensation held under Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (for short 'KIAD Act') a sum of -3- NC: 2025:KHC:6367 WP No. 48010 of 2014 Rs.2,65,000/- was fixed as compensation in respect of dry land which was revised by a resolution passed by the Price Determination Committee of the respondent No.3 to Rs.4,56,000/-. That on 13.05.2014 petitioner was paid the revised/enhanced compensation in respect of his dry land at the rate of Rs.4,56,000/- per acre.
3. Counsel for the petitioner referring to the communication at Annexure-E submits that the petitioner received Rs.7,56,960/- as compensation in respect of 1 acre 66 cents of his land at the rate of Rs.4,56,000/- per acre. That the petitioner received the said sum under protest reserving his right to seek revised rate of compensation as seen at Annexure-E.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner referring to another communication addressed by beneficiary-respondent No.3 to certain land owners and similar other communications vehemently submits that after payment of the compensation of Rs.7,56,960/- at the rate of Rs.4,56,000/- per acre to the petitioner, there was another revision made in the meeting held in Office of the Special Land Acquisition Officer of KIADB on -4- NC: 2025:KHC:6367 WP No. 48010 of 2014 21.12.2006 in furtherance to which ex-gratia amount was paid to the land losers and the said benefit has not been extended to the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner however submits that the petitioner does not have the information with regard to the additional exgratia amount paid to the land losers. However, he insists that the petitioner has a definite information of the compensation having been revised in the nature of payment of exgratia amount. He submits if the petitioner is entitled for such a exgratia payment, respondent - authorities be directed to make the payment in that regard.
6. Learned counsel for the respondent -KIADB on the other hand submits that petitioner would not be entitled for exgratia amount even if any, inasmuch as, the petitioner was paid the revised compensation as per the resolution passed by the respondent -KIADB and the Price Fixation Committee of the respondent No.3 as far back as on 13.05.2014 and the petitioner cannot keep on revising his demand for enhanced compensation.
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC:6367 WP No. 48010 of 2014
7. Said submission is vehemently supported and supplemented by counsel for respondent No.3 who taking this Court through the order dated 22.10.2008 that was passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.3432/2008 and connected matters and the consequent proceedings of the meeting held on 20.10.2008 in the Chambers of Chief Executive Officer and Executive Member of the Karnataka Industrial Development Board regarding implementation of the resolution of the Board dated 21.12.2006 for the payment of exgratia amount submits that there has been no further enhancement other than Rs.4,56,000/- per acre.
8. She insists that even if any resolution passed subsequent to the said resolution dated 20.10.2008, the petitioner would not be entitled for any benefit, inasmuch as, the petitioner was paid the compensation in terms of the said resolution. She refers to the judgement of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of SURESH D. BANKAPUR AND ORS. VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS passed in W.A.Nos.31109-31111/2012 and W.A.No.30007/2013 decided on 28.03.2013 to submit that once the land owner had entered into a consent agreement to receive the compensation -6- NC: 2025:KHC:6367 WP No. 48010 of 2014 he cannot seek the enhancement subsequently. Hence, seeks for dismissal of the petition.
9. Heard. Perused the records.
10. Admitted position as noted above is that the compensation which was initially fixed at Rs.2,65,000/- per acre in terms of Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act was revised at the instance of KIADB itself to Rs.4,56,000/- which amount has been admittedly received by the petitioner as evidenced by the document at Annexure-E in an aggregate sum of Rs.7,56,960/- towards his 1 acre 66 cents of land. The grievance of the petitioner is subsequent to the receipt of the said amount, there was one more revision of the rate of compensation at the instance of the respondent- authorities by way of exgratia amount and the petitioner has been deprived of the said enhancement.
11. The submission of the learned counsel for the respondent-authorities that once the petitioner has received the compensation under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act, he is not entitled for retracting from the terms, which may not hold good under the facts of the instant case, inasmuch as, the -7- NC: 2025:KHC:6367 WP No. 48010 of 2014 compensation which was determined under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act at Rs.2,65,000/- was admittedly enhanced by the respondents themselves to Rs.4,56,000/- per acre. In that view of the matter should there be any further enhancement and should there be any circumstances under which the land owners as that of the petitioner were paid, such enhanced amount of compensation the petitioner may also be entitled for similar treatment.
12. For the aforesaid reasons, the following;
ORDER (1) Petition is disposed off.
(2) Petitioner is at liberty to make representation to the respondent-KIADB. The respondent-KIADB shall consider the representation to be made by the petitioner on the following terms;
(i) if the resolution dated 21.12.2006 as relied upon by the petitioner to seek exgratia amount provides for payment of compensation to those who as similarly -8- NC: 2025:KHC:6367 WP No. 48010 of 2014 situated as that of the petitioner and petitioner be paid such enhanced amount.
(ii) If the said resolution does not provide for payment of compensation to those who have already received the compensation in terms of earlier revision/enhancement as that of the petitioner, petitioner shall not be entitled for such compensation.
(iii) Such exercise and consideration be made and appropriate orders be passed within an outer limit of twelve (12) weeks from the date of presentation of the representation.
Sd/-
(M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RU, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27