Trending :
Lawtext
Search
Login / Register
Sign In
HomeJudgement
Scroll Down To Discover
High Court

Karnataka High Court examines claims of land acquisition lapsing under Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 in writ petitions against Bangalore Development Authority and Mysore Urban Development Authority. The petitioners sought declarations that acquisition had lapsed under Section 24 of the 2013 Act, citing non-compliance with statutory timelines.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
Admin
2026-09-13 02:52:45
  • 100
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Issue of Consideration

Whether the land acquisition proceedings have lapsed under Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2016 LawText (KAR) (03) 30

W.P.Nos.38868-38870/2015, W.P.Nos.38871-38874/2015, W.P.Nos.35858 & 35880-35881/2013, W.P.No.82/2015, W.P.Nos.26980-26982/2015, W.P.No.83/2015, W.P.Nos.15616-15620/2013, W.P.No.40076/2014

2016-03-10

Anand Byrareddy

L. Nageshwara Rao, B.L. Sanjeev, V. Lakshminarayana, Vikram Balaji B.L., Shilpa Rani, C.M. Nagabhushan, Rajeswara P.N., H.R. Narayana Rao, Ashok Haranahalli, Manmohan P.N., S.M. Chandrashekhar, Ramesh T.R., Madhusudhan R Naik, Laxminarayana, D. Nagaraja, S. Vijay Shankar, T.P. Vivekananda, K. Krishna, C.R.G.

Smt. K.M.Chikkathayamma & Ors. (W.P.38868-38870/2015), Smt. Shivamma & Ors. (W.P.38871-38874/2015), Sri. Viswanatha Reddy & Ors. (W.P.35858 & 35880-35881/2013), Sri. M. Jagadish (W.P.82/2015), Narasimha Reddy .N & Ors. (W.P.26980-26982/2015), Smt. T.K.Shilpashree (W.P.83/2015), Sri. Ramachandra & Ors. (W.P.15616-15620/2013), Sri. L. Chandrashekar & Anr. (W.P.40076/2014)

State of Karnataka, Urban Development Department; State of Karnataka, Housing and Urban Development Department; Mysore Urban Development Authority; Bangalore Development Authority; Special Land Acquisition Officer, MUDA; Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer, BDA

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petitions challenging land acquisition proceedings as having lapsed under the 2013 Act.

Remedy Sought

Petitioners seeking declaration that acquisitions have lapsed and quashing of notifications, and in one case, issuance of No Objection Certificate.

Filing Reason

Alleged non-compliance with Section 24 of the 2013 Act, leading to deemed lapse of acquisition proceedings.

Issues

Whether the acquisition proceedings have lapsed under Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

Judgment Excerpts

praying to declare that the land acquisition proceedings initiated against the schedule lands belonging to the petitioners have been lapsed by virtue of the coming into force of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

Acts & Sections

  • Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013: Section 24
  • Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976: Section 17(1), Section 19(1)
  • Constitution of India, 1950: Article 226, Article 227
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Tags :
land acquisition lapse Section 24 BDA MUDA writ petition Articles 226 and 227 2013 Act

Pay once for this file or subscribe for unlimited downloads

Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Municipal Corporation in Octroi Levy Dispute Under Cantonments Act, 1924 and Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949. Notification of 1881 Authorized Variable Octroi Rates and Articles; 1963 Revised Rules Valid. 2026-09-17 04:26:34
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows BSNL Appeal in TTA Recruitment Case: Reserved Category Candidates Selected on Merit Can Be Adjusted Against Reserved Vacancies. The Court held that the High Court erred in directing shuffling of candidates as it would unsettle th... 2026-09-17 04:26:28
Categories
Popular Tags
writ petition Natural Justice acquittal murder Compensation burden of proof limitation Article 226 Land acquisition benefit of doubt
Follow Us

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensation Cases,...

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Dispute — Upho...

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Suit for Spec...

Bombay High Court Dismisses MBBS Student's Writ Petition Seeking Fourth Attempt in Anatomy...

High Court of Bombay Hears Writ Petitions Challenging Tenancy Orders Under Bombay Tenancy ...

Supreme Court Acquits Appellant in Prevention of Corruption Act Case Due to Absence of Pec...

Supreme Court Modifies High Court Order Appointing Different Arbitrator Under Section 11 o...

Supreme Court Upholds Scrutiny Committee Invalidation of Scheduled Tribe Caste Claim but P...

Supreme Court Allows Homebuyers' Appeal and Waives Time Extension Charges Imposed by Devel...

Supreme Court Dismisses Insurer's and Claimant's Appeals in Motor Accident Death Compensat...

Lost Your Password?