By: Express News ServiceBengaluru | December 25, 2025 03:55 PM IST 3 min readThe petitioner also pointed to proceedings before the Supreme Court, where the Karnataka government had filed an affidavit stating that 554 acres of excess land had been handed over, with no further land to be delivered. (File photo)The Karnataka High Court recently quashed the acquisition of a one-acre land parcel in Bengaluru South’s Thalaghattapura, originally acquired 17 years ago for the Bengaluru-Mysore Infrastructure Corridor Project (BMICP). The order was passed by a single-judge bench of Justice KS Hemalekha on December 5 and made public Wednesday.In this case, the owner, one Rathna Reddy, had approached the court against the acquisition, claiming to be the owner who was still in possession of the property. The petitioner claimed that despite 17 years passing since the final acquisition notification in 2008, the state had neither awarded compensation nor taken possession; moreover, there was a June 2025 order from the Planning Office of the BMICP which stated that no ramp/link interchange, etc, was planned on that particular survey number property.The petitioner also pointed to proceedings before the Supreme Court, where the Karnataka government had filed an affidavit stating that 554 acres of excess land had been handed over, with no further land to be delivered.Before the bench, Reddy’s counsel argued that the acquisition proceedings had become “non est” (no longer valid) since the acquisition award had not been passed for so many years. He also argued that while no steps had been taken to wrap up these proceedings, the actual possession of the land continued with Reddy.Must Read | Karnataka High Court flags ‘inadvertent’ gap in Hindu Succession Act, asks Centre to recast laws on widows rightsHe further submitted that since an endorsement to the contrary had been issued by BMICP, the Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprise (NICE) could not say that the land was required for some other purpose. Furthermore, NICE was the only concessionaire in the matter, while BMICP’s technical determinations could not be overridden by NICE.On the other hand, the counsels for the state, representing the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board, NICE, and others, argued that the petitioner’s case itself was barred by delay, as the preliminary notification was issued 19 years ago.It was further argued by NICE’s counsel that land had to be acquired to construct a ramp between Kanakapura Road (NH 209) and the BMICP peripheral road. Since the petitioner had not handed over possession, a makeshift ramp had to be installed elsewhere.Story continues below this adThe bench took note of the delay on the side of the acquisition process, stating, ” No award has been passed for more than 17 years after the final notification. The respondents have not offered any acceptable explanation. ……such extraordinary dormancy defeats the statute and vitiates the acquisition. There is considerable force in the submission of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the impugned acquisition cannot survive in light of the consistent judicial pronouncement of this Court and the Apex Court regarding inordinate delay….”In light of the planning authority’s endorsement this June, the court agreed with the petitioner’s contentions, pointing to the absence of any public purpose, the extreme delay, and the lack of possession of the land in question. Having made these observations, the bench quashed the acquisition notifications. © The Indian Express Pvt LtdTags:Karnataka High Courtland acquisition