Karnataka HC annulled BMICP’s 17-year-old land acquisition in Thalaghattapura, citing delay, no compensation, and lack of public purpose
The Karnataka High Court has set aside the acquisition of a one-acre land parcel in Bengaluru South’s Thalaghattapura, which had been notified nearly 17 years ago for the Bengaluru-Mysore Infrastructure Corridor Project (BMICP). The ruling, delivered by Justice KS Hemalekha on December 5 and made public this week, marks a significant development in the long-running dispute over land acquisition for the project.
The case was brought forward by Rathna Reddy, who claimed ownership and continued possession of the property. Reddy argued that despite the final acquisition notification being issued in 2008, the state had neither awarded compensation nor taken possession of the land. He further highlighted a June 2025 endorsement from the BMICP Planning Office, which confirmed that no ramp or interchange was planned on the specific survey number, thereby questioning the necessity of the acquisition.
The petitioner also referred to proceedings before the Supreme Court, where the Karnataka government had acknowledged handing over 554 acres of excess land and stated that no further land was required. Reddy’s counsel contended that the prolonged delay without an acquisition award rendered the proceedings invalid, while possession of the property remained with the petitioner. They emphasized that BMICP’s technical determinations could not be overridden by Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprise (NICE), the project’s concessionaire.
Also Read: RCB pacer Yash Dayal in serious trouble: POCSO case, bail rejected, IPL future uncertain
In response, counsels representing the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board, NICE, and other state agencies argued that the petition was barred by delay, as the preliminary notification had been issued nearly two decades ago. NICE maintained that the land was needed to construct a ramp connecting Kanakapura Road (NH 209) with the BMICP peripheral road, and that a temporary ramp had been installed elsewhere due to the petitioner’s refusal to hand over possession.
The court, however, observed that no acquisition award had been passed for over 17 years and that the authorities failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay. It concluded that such prolonged dormancy undermined the validity of the acquisition. Taking into account the planning authority’s endorsement, the absence of a public purpose, and the continued possession of the land by the petitioner, the bench quashed the acquisition notifications, bringing closure to the long-pending dispute.
Also Read: ₹30-crore gem-studded lord ram idol donated by Karnataka devotee for Ayodhya Temple