Karnataka HC dismisses PIL on procedural defect in one notification to acquire 518 acres for Bidadi township project

The court made these observations while dismissing a petition filed by a man who raised a limited question about the legality of the procedure adopted in issuing the first of the final notices, issued on June 13, to acquire around 518 acres, part of the total 9,600 acres proposed to be acquired for the project.

Despite dismissing a PIL related to the Bidadi township project, the Karnataka High Court on Monday said the order should not be construed as expressing its opinion on other issues related to the notifications issued for the project.

The court made these observations while dismissing a petition filed by a man who raised a limited question about the legality of the procedure adopted in issuing the first of the final notices, issued on June 13, to acquire around 518 acres, part of the total 9,600 acres proposed to be acquired for the project.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice KS Hemalekha passed the order while dismissing a petition filed by 29-year-old Rajesh Kampalapura Basavanna, a resident of Kampalapura village, Periyapatna, Mysuru district. The petitioner argued personally in court.

The petitioner challenged only the June 13 final notification for acquisition of 516 acres of “fertile” multi-crop agricultural land in two villages for the proposed Greater Bengaluru Integrated District (GBIT) in Bidadi.

The petition’s primary legal contention was that although the acquisition was made under the provisions of the Karnataka Urban Development Act (KUDA), 1987, compensation is offered under the Right to Fair Compensation and Land Acquisition Transparency Act, 2013. It argued that the acquisition made under KUDA circumvents mandatory legal safeguards, namely the Social Impact Act 201SIA.

“The only contention of the petitioner is that the said notification under the development scheme of the said KUDA is illegal because the amount of compensation is payable under the Right to Fair Compensation Act and the Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013, all other provisions of the said Act are also required to be followed and therefore the said notification is illegal,” the Bench said. We cannot accept this content.

“However, it is made clear that this order should not be construed as expressing an opinion on any other issues relating to the said notification,” the Bench said in its order.

The petitioner Bench had earlier said that the farmers have been protesting continuously for more than 500 days against the acquisition as their land will be converted into a real estate project. He argued that the final notification could not be issued without conducting a social impact assessment study under the 2013 Act.

Published – 20 Jul 2026 23:16 IST