In a significant ruling, the Karnataka High Court has set aside the acquisition of a one-acre plot in south Bengaluru that was earmarked for the Bangalore-Mysore Infrastructure Corridor Project (BMICP). The court cited an unexplained delay of over 17 years in completing the acquisition process and a lack of subsisting public purpose.
Court Cites Inordinate Delay and Lack of Purpose
Justice KS Hemalekha allowed the petition filed by the landowner, Rathna Reddy S, who had challenged the proceedings initiated under the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act (KIADB), 1966. The land is located in Thalaghattapura village within Bengaluru South taluk.
The court noted that while a preliminary notification was issued on June 14, 2006, followed by a final notification on October 16, 2008, the acquiring authority had neither passed the final award nor taken possession of the land even after 17 long years. This prolonged dormancy, the judge held, destroyed the legality of the acquisition.
Key Evidence: Land Not Needed for Project
A crucial piece of evidence was an endorsement dated June 5, 2025, from the BMICP Area Planning Office. It clearly stated that no ramp, interchange, link alignment, or any other BMICP-related facility existed or was proposed on the petitioner's land.
Justice Hemalekha also referred to the state government's submission in a Supreme Court contempt petition, where it stated that 554 acres of excess land had already been handed over to the project concessionaire, Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprise Limited (NICEL), and no additional land would be transferred.
Arguments by Authorities and the Court's Rebuttal
The state government, KIADB, and the concessionaire had sought the petition's dismissal on grounds of delay, arguing the landowner approached the court 19 years after the initial notification. They also contended that the acquisition had been upheld earlier and attained finality.
NICEL argued the land was indispensable for a permanent ramp connecting Kanakapura Road to the BMICP peripheral road. However, the court found these arguments unpersuasive in light of the overwhelming delay and the planning authority's endorsement that the land was not required.
Court Upholds Constitutional Right to Timely Process
Justice Hemalekha invoked the Supreme Court's stance in the Kolkata Municipal Corporation case, emphasizing that the right to restitution, fair compensation, and a timely conclusion of proceedings are integral to Article 300A of the Constitution.
The judge concluded that the absence of any subsisting public purpose, coupled with the inordinate delay in concluding statutory steps, rendered the acquisition unsustainable. Since no lawful possession was taken, the court quashed the impugned notifications, granting relief to the landowner.
