Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from land in Survey No.51 of Haradagere Village, Tumkur District, originally owned by the father of the first petitioner. The property was gifted by the first petitioner to the second petitioner, his daughter, via registered deed in 2017. The petitioners alleged that the State had utilised parts of this land—three guntas for a school building and six guntas for a road—since 1957 without formal acquisition or compensation. After multiple representations, the first petitioner approached the High Court in W.P. No. 12385/2016. A coordinate bench disposed of that writ petition on 19.09.2019, directing the Deputy Commissioner to consider the claim, determine ownership, and if the land belonged to the petitioner, acquire it and pay compensation; otherwise, no compensation was due. Consequently, the Deputy Commissioner passed the order dated 08.11.2021, rejecting the claim. The order recorded that the school started in 1957 with the voluntary permission of the first petitioner’s father, and the land had been in continuous state use since then, thus no compensation was payable. The petitioners invoked contempt jurisdiction in C.C.C. No. 320/2022 and thereafter filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking quashing of the Deputy Commissioner’s order and a mandamus for acquisition and compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. Before the High Court, counsel for petitioners argued that admitted utilisation entitled them to compensation. The State, represented by the High Court Government Pleader, countered that the land was voluntarily handed over in 1957, and the claim after 65 years was barred by delay and laches. The court heard arguments and reserved the matter on 24.09.2025. The judgement text provided does not contain the final reasoned order or verdict; the record ends with the recitation of the earlier direction. Consequently, the court’s analysis, decision, ratio, and operative directions remain unknown from the available excerpt.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners are entitled to compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for the land allegedly utilised by the State for construction of a government school and formation of a road in Survey No.51 of Haradagere Village since 1957; and whether the denial of compensation by the Deputy Commissioner was justified on grounds of delay and voluntary handover.
Law Points
- Article 300A of the Constitution
- Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition
- Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act
- 2013
- compensation for land utilized without formal acquisition
- delay and laches
- voluntary handover
- due process of law
Case Details
2025 LawText (KAR) (11) 23
Writ Petition No. 3982 of 2023 (LA - RES)
Sri Kishan K.S., advocate for petitioners; Smt. Rashmi Rao, HCGP for respondents
Sri H.P. Ramesh and Sushmitha H.R.
State of Karnataka and The Deputy Commissioner, Tumakuru District
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 seeking quashing of Deputy Commissioner's order denying compensation and mandamus for formal acquisition and compensation under the 2013 Act for land used for school and road without acquisition.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought quashing of the order dated 08.11.2021 and a mandamus directing respondents to formally acquire 9 guntas of land in Sy.No.51 and award compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
Filing Reason
The Deputy Commissioner rejected the claim for compensation, recording that the school and road were constructed in 1957 with the voluntary permission of the first petitioner's father, and that the land had been in continuous government use since then, leading to denial.
Previous Decisions
The High Court in W.P. No. 12385/2016 directed the Deputy Commissioner to consider the representations and pass an order after determining ownership. The Deputy Commissioner passed the impugned order on 08.11.2021 denying compensation. The petitioners also initiated contempt proceedings in C.C.C. No. 320/2022.
Issues
Whether the Deputy Commissioner's order denying compensation on grounds of voluntary handover and inordinate delay since 1957 was valid?
Whether the petitioners are entitled to compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for the land utilised without formal acquisition?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners submitted that the admitted utilisation of their land for a school and road entities them to compensation under the 2013 Act, and that the denial was arbitrary.
Respondents contended that the land was voluntarily handed over by the first petitioner's father in 1957, and the claim made after 65 years was barred by delay and laches, warranting dismissal of the petition.
Judgment Excerpts
the first petitioner noticing the fact that the government has utilised the land belonging to them for the purpose of establishment of a school wayback in the year 1957, submits several representations seeking compensation
If the authority found that the road formation and the school constructed the property does not belong to the petitioner the petitioner is not entitled for any compensation.
Procedural History
The father of the first petitioner owned land in Sy.No.51 of Haradagere Village. In 1957, the government constructed a school and road on part of the land, allegedly with the father's permission. In 2017, the first petitioner gifted the property to the second petitioner. The petitioners filed representations for compensation and, upon non-consideration, approached the High Court in W.P. No. 12385/2016. A coordinate bench on 19.09.2019 directed the Deputy Commissioner to consider the claim and pass a reasoned order on ownership and compensation. The Deputy Commissioner passed the impugned order on 08.11.2021 denying compensation. The petitioners filed a contempt case in C.C.C. No. 320/2022 and subsequently filed the present writ petition (W.P. No. 3982/2023) challenging the denial.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226
- Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013:
