Last update:
The Bangalore Palace Land Act of Karnataka directly challenges a Supreme Court on compensation, which claims the state’s right to override previous decisions and determine land use independently. This has led to a major legal battle.
Bangalore Palace (Wikimedia Commons)
The Government of Karnataka has launched the Bangalore Mahal (Use and Regulation of Land) Act, 2025, which can greatly affect urban planning and infrastructure development in Bengaluru.
Bangalore Palace Regulating Land Use
The Act 472 acres establishes a framework for the use of Bangalore Palace property, which was acquired by the state under the Bangalore Palace (Acquisition and Transfer) Act, 1996. Following recent decisions on compensation and development rights of the Supreme Court, the state government is now taking steps to secure land use, compensation, and its financial interests.
Bellary and Jaymahal at stake are not the fate of 15 acres required to widen the roads, but also the judicial authority, legislative power and wide issues related to evaluation of historical properties in rapidly developing urban centers in India.
Government’s power to use land
The new Act gives the state government the right to use any part of the Bangalore Palace property for infrastructure projects. However, it also allows the government to withdraw from such projects if necessary. In such cases, the government should restore land in its original position and bear the costs involved.
The Act also states that once the land is used, compensation will be paid according to the provisions of the Act, overroding any court orders or laws that otherwise suggest. The move is seen as an attempt to prevent future legal disputes and keep the cost of compensation under investigation.
Compensation: A certain formula
The Act establishes a certain compensation formula based on the evaluation of the land prescribed under the Acquisition Act of 1996. The guidance value will be calculated in proportion to the original acquisition value, effectively overrising any court verdict, which can suggest high, market-based evaluation.
Compensation will be provided in two forms – monitoring compensation and transferable development rights (TDRS) – Proportional for mool evaluation. The contenders cannot demand any other form of compensation prescribed in the law. Even if the courts have otherwise ruled, the formula of the state will take precedence.
Legal protection for state
The Act protects the state from further legal challenges by protecting all the previous compensation payments made before the implementation of the law. Bhuswamis who have already received payment cannot claim additional amount under the new law. Additionally, refunds of already paid compensation will not be allowed, even if the government does not proceed later with a infrastructure project.
In cases where many parties claim compensation for the same part of the land, the state commissioner will deposit the amount. The claimants should resolve their disputes in the court, and the right contenders can use compensation only after the final decree is released. The purpose of this remedy is to prevent many payments or fraud claims.
No liability for government officials
The Act provides legal immunity to government officials involved in implementing its provisions. Under the law, any work done in “good faith” cannot be challenged in civil or criminal courts, state officials can be preserved by being individually responsible for compensation disputes, delays in development or legal disputes.
An overriding law
The Bangalore Palace (Use and Regulation of Land) Act, 2025, override all existing laws that may be contrary to its provisions. This clearly states that no court’s decision or legal provision with this Act will not apply to the land of Bangalore Mahal. It effectively reduces any high compensation claims, conflicting land-use rules, or previous agreements that do not align with the new structure.
Valid perspective
The Supreme Court advocate KV Dhananjay provides a different view on the dispute. He says, “The 1996 law performed the title of 477 acres of Bangalore Palace land with the state government under Section 4. The High Court initially banned the law, but eventually dismissed Vodeers’ writ petitions. When the Vodiyers approached the Supreme Court, the court did not continue migration on the 1996 Act, but gave them limited relief; Saying that the status quo will be maintained and the vodeers will not be removed … “
A fight on land and compensation
The land of Bangalore Palace has been at the center of the long -standing legal battle. The Karnataka High Court upheld the constitutional validity of the 1996 acquisition, and the Supreme Court had not issued any migration on its operation, although it directed the ‘status quo’ and preserved Vodeers from spreading.
However, in December 2024, the Supreme Court ruled in an contempt case that transferred Rights (TDR) should be provided for part of the land marked for road widening. This decision based on the guidance value prevalent under the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, in addition to changing the urban planning of Bengaluru, can put a huge financial burden on the state’s treasury.
The dispute over Bangalore Palace returned on 21 November 1996, when the Government of Karnataka enforced the Bangalore Palace (Acquisition and Transfer) Act. Two years later, a similar attempt was made to handle the Mysore Palace and its properties. In both examples, the anterior royal family took steps in court, saying that the assets and possession of the properties remained with them, while the government said the land was already owned by the state.
The legal quarrel intensified around 1999 when fresh litigation took place due to a plan to widen the roads around the palace ground. More than 15 acres of land is required from the palace complex, the proposed project aimed at reducing the traffic congestion. Given the high costs of land acquisition in Bengaluru, the government considered using transferable development rights (TDR), which allows landlords or builders to exceed the permissible construction limit elsewhere in exchange for surrendering to their land.
The erstwhile royal family argued that they had sought TDR certificates, which would not put a burden on the state’s treasury as these certificates can be sold to the developers. However, the government argued that the land was already owned by the land, denying any need for compensation.
The Karnataka state government has said that it will deposit the amount in the treasury of the Supreme Court and hand it over to the previous royal family.
Government’s response to SC order
In December 2024, the Supreme Court ruled in an contempt case, directed the Karnataka government to issue a TDR certificate to the previous royal family. In response, the state government in January 2025 promoted an ordinance to ignore this directive, replaced by the bill offered in the ongoing budget session of the legislature.
The Siddaramaiah -led Congress government has faced allegations from the previous royal family, claiming that they are being specially targeted. However, previous governments led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) have also said that the palace and its land belong to the state. The BJP, under the leadership of Vijayendra’s Deputy Leader of State President and opposition Arvind Bellad, staged a walkout when the bill was introduced in the assembly.
The Karnataka cabinet approved the bill on March 6, 2025, yet the state needed to submit a TDR certificate of more than Rs 3,000 crore with the court for the Supreme Court directive. These certificates are frozen until a final decision is given, causing the matter to be unresolved for now.
Historical importance of palace
The Bangalore Palace was built in 1887 by the Vadiyar dynasty of Mysore, inspired by Windsor Castle in England. When India gained independence, like other royal rulers, the Mysore royal family interacted with the new nation, who recognized some properties as their personal property.
These arrangements lasted until 1996 when Karnataka implemented the Bangalore Palace (Acquisition and Transfer) Act to acquire the property, offering Rs 11 crore as compensation for the entire 472 acres. The legal heirs of the previous Maharaja challenged the acquisition in all ways in the Supreme Court, where the appeal is pending in front of a large bench.
Beyond the walls of the palace
The dispute is beyond the grounds of the palace. Property owners across India are looking closely to see if governments can change the rules of compensation after receiving land. The case highlights the challenge of balanced urban development with heritage protection. Cities require better roads, but how historical qualities are given importance is an important question.
Meanwhile, the palace, a tudor-gothic milestone, is open to tourists. Its ground is now divided by wide roads, which takes thousands of passengers daily. The irony is that the public already benefits from these roads while compensation remains unresolved.
The matter is now back to the Supreme Court, where the judges will decide whether the government may change the compensation law to counter the contempt decision.
