In 1995, the Janata Dal led government approved the construction of a 164-km expressway to connect Mysuru and Bengaluru, along with the development of peripheral roads, and five new townships in Bengaluru, Bidadi, Ramanagara and Mandya, with around 18,000 acres earmarked for roads and townships. The entire project was called the Bangalore Mysore Infrastructure Corridor (BMIC) project.
An MoU was signed with a consortium headed by Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprises (NICE) Limited. A Framework Agreement (FWA) to implement the project was signed between NICE and the state government on 3 April 1997. According to the FWA, a total of 20,193 acres of land were to be handed over to NICE, wherein 6,999 acres were required for a toll road and 13,194 acres for townships. Of the 20,193 acres, 6,956 acres were government land and 13,237 acres were private land. The Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) issued acquisition notifications for an enormous 26,488 acres of land, far exceeding the initially estimated 2,700 acres.
On 14 October 1998, an agreement was signed between NICE and the KIADB for acquiring land. The same year, KIADB issued notices to farmers for the acquisition of land. However, until 2010, NICE had acquired only 7,000 acres. The delay in land acquisition can be attributed to protests over what farmers deem unfair compensation for their fertile lands.
As of March 2019, only a four-kilometre stretch of the expressway, 41 kilometres of the peripheral road and 8.5 kilometres of the link road had been constructed by NICE. There were inordinate delays in the execution and completion of the project following numerous litigations filed by several farmers, alleging corruption and illegalities in the acquisition process. Meanwhile, the KIADB had not withdrawn its notice of land acquisition, leaving the farmers in a state of uncertainty about the status of their lands.
In the course of over 20 years, land prices around Bengaluru and Mysuru had also skyrocketed. A 2010 report quotes a senior NICE official as saying that farmers were paid about Rs 7.5 lakh per acre for land around Mysuru at the start of the decade. By 2016, the land price in the area went up to Rs 5070 lakh per acre, according to a property consultant. Farmers estimate the rate to be even higher. "The government is offering just Rs 85,000 per acre against the market rate of more than Rs 2 crore. This is an insult to us," a farmer told a news daily during a protest.
The farmers had demanded denotification of land that was not acquired and fair compensation, based on market price, for notified land that will be acquired. Successive governments have failed to either expedite the project completion or take legal action against the company, or cancel the MoU. The House Committee of the state legislature submitted a report claiming massive corruption and recommended scrapping of the MoU, along with denotifying the lands and returning them to the farmers. This report was not available in the public domain. Other reports, such as the Environmental Impact Assessment and Social Impact Assessment, pertaining to the project are all classified.
In 2023, National Highway 275 was upgraded into an expressway and later designated as an “access-controlled highway ,” making much of the original NICE plan largely unnecessary. In October 2024, many farmers and activists opposed the revival of the project and asked the government to work on paying compensation rather than reviving the project as it is not in the interest of the public.
In the same period, the Karnataka government announced that the Bidadi township would be developed through a joint venture model with farmers, utilising 12,000 acres of currently unused land.
As of September 2025, only 49 km of the proposed 64-km toll road around Bengaluru has been completed. The five planned townships remain stalled, and large portions of the acquired land continue to lie idle due to ongoing litigation and public opposition.
In July 2025, the Karnataka High Court, led by Justice R. Devdas, quashed the acquisition notifications issued between 1998 and 2009. The court ruled in favour of the petitions filed by P Manjunatha Reddy and others, noting that no award had been passed to date and none of the petitioners’ land had been utilised for the proposed expressway, interchanges, toll plaza, peripheral road, or link road.
In September 2025, retired inspector CA Siddalingaiah filed a complaint alleging that 79 acres and 7 guntas in Survey No. 86, Kodigehalli, legally transferred to NICE through KIADB orders from 1999 to 2002, were targeted using forged Aadhaar details and fake 1954-55 land-grant records. Although earlier probes found the documents bogus, a 2025 Special DC order reportedly favoured the accused, and police are yet to file an FIR.
Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Complaint against procedural violations
Refusal to give up land for the project
Demand for more compensation than promised
Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Region Classification
Rural
Type of Land
Common and Private
Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land)
What was the action taken by the police?
How many people did the police detain or arrest?
What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?
Did the person face any violence while in police custody?
If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?
If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?
Legislation under which the accused was charged
Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?
In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?
Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?
Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)
Status of Project
Project underway despite protests
Original Project Deadline
2018
Whether the Project has been Delayed
Yes
Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users
Agricultural land
Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict
Yes
Source/Reference
https://starofmysore.com/17-years-on-nice-road-land-row-is-back/
Total investment involved (in Crores):
₹
12000
Type of investment:
Cost of Project
Year of Estimation
1995
Has the Conflict Ended?
Yes
When did it end?
July/2025
Why did the conflict end?
In July 2025, the Karnataka High Court, led by Justice R. Devdas, cancelled the 1998–2009 land acquisition notifications. The Court ruled in favour of P. Manjunatha Reddy and others, noting that no award was ever passed and none of their land had been used for the proposed road projects.
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
Land Acquisition Laws, Land Acquisition Laws, Land Acquisition Laws, Constitutional Law
Legislations/Policies Involved
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute
What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?
What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?
Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:
Controversial land acquisition by the government
Legal Status:
In Court
Status of Case In Court
Disposed
Whether any adjudicatory body was approached
Name of the adjudicatory body
Name(s) of the Court(s)
Supreme Court of India
Case Number
CA No. 3492-94 of 2005 and CA No. 1215 of 2011
Main Reasoning/Decision of court
Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:
Displacement
Whether criminal law was used against protestors:
Reported Details of the Violation:
Date of Violation
Location of Violation
Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:
Department of Urban Development
PSUs Involved in the Conflict:
Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board
Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?
Yes
Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached
LCW contacted NICE Managing Director Ashok Keney, who refused to comment citing confidentiality of the matter.
Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:
Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprises Limited
Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?
Yes
Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:
Mysore Lok Swaraj Andolan, Karnataka Vimochana Ranga
What was the action taken by the police?
How many people did the police detain or arrest?
What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?
Did the person face any violence while in police custody?
If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?
If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?
Legislation under which the accused was charged
Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?
In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?
Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?
Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?




