‘Nothing nice about NICE, farmers robbed’: Court on Bengaluru-Mysuru link project

Expressing surprise over why the state government had not reviewed or cancelled the project despite NICE failing to construct the proposed 111-km expressway and five satellite townships aimed at decongesting Bengaluru, the court said, “In our view, it is a fraud on the statute and the Constitution.”

Referring to documents produced by landowners and NICE’s financial statements, the court noted that land acquired for a public infrastructure project had undergone extensive commercial development, including residential layouts, commercial complexes, tech parks, and hotels. It added that NICE was collecting heavy tolls on peripheral roads and hiking rates without prior government approval, in violation of the framework agreement.

Calling for an independent probe by a special team of experts into criminal acts of omission and commission, the court nevertheless expressed scepticism that the government would act.

“Such an exercise would never be taken up as the state government itself is an accomplice in allowing the project proponents to earn huge profits illegally by diverting lands against the development agreement.”

“The proposed project has not done any public good or served any public purpose except to benefit project proponents in unimaginable proportions,” the order added.

The challenge by NICE

The court was hearing appeals filed by NICE challenging a July 4, 2025 order passed by Justice R Devdas, which had cancelled the acquisition of several acres of private land acquired by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) for the project.

The single-judge bench had quashed the proceedings because preliminary notifications (issued between 1998 and 2009) and final notifications (issued between 2003 and 2009) were never followed by an award or compensation. Moreover, the court had accepted the landowners’ contention that several acquired plots were never utilised for the core components of the BMIC project.

Challenging the ruling, NICE argued that once final acquisition notifications were issued and possession taken, ownership vested absolutely with the state. It further contended that the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development (KIAD) Act, 1966, does not prescribe a statutory timeframe within which an award must be passed.

Rejecting this argument, the division bench noted that the core issue was whether the state could indefinitely delay compensation while keeping the acquisition valid solely because the land had vested with it.

“While the state asserts that the lands have vested absolutely in it, the landowners have neither retained ownership nor received the compensation which the law contemplates… Such a state of affairs, if permitted to continue indefinitely, would reduce the constitutional rights guaranteed under Article 300A to a mere formality,” the bench held.

It said the absence of an explicit statutory limitation in the KIAD Act cannot be treated as an “unrestricted licence” to postpone passing awards indefinitely.

Dismissing the appeals, the court clarified that its judgment did not seek to reopen past Supreme Court findings upholding the validity of the project, but was instead founded on the subsequent and continuing failure of acquiring authorities to discharge their statutory obligations.

BMIC project

Envisioned in 1995 under the H D Deve Gowda-led government, the project was designed to construct a 111-km, 4- to 6-lane expressway between Bengaluru and Mysuru, accompanied by peripheral roads and five new satellite townships, each supporting a population of one lakh. NICE was established as the special-purpose vehicle to execute the project.

Although the project was scheduled for completion in 10 years, with a 30-year toll collection right, NICE has constructed only about 5 km of the core expressway over the last 25 years.

The BMIC is distinct from the recently operationalised 10-lane Bengaluru-Mysuru Expressway.