SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(SC) 735

K.G.BALAKRISHNAN, G.P.MATHUR, TARUN CHATTERJEE
P. Narayanappa – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent


JUDGMENT

G.P. Mathur, J. - Leave granted.

2. These appeals, by special leave, have been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 6.4.2004 of a Division Bench of Karnataka High Court by which writ appeals filed by the appellants were dismissed and the judgment and order dated 28.1.2004 of the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petitions was affirmed. The subject matter of challenge in the writ petitions were two notifications issued under Section 28(1) and 28(4) of Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

3. The impugned notifications were issued for acquisition of land for establishment and development of industries by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board. Before adverting to the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties, it will be convenient to reproduce the impugned notifications. The first notification bears No. CI:289:SPQ:2001 and was issued on 10.12.2001, relevant part whereof, is reproduced below :

"INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE SECRETARIAT

NOTIFICATION

NO:CI:289:SPQ:2001, Bangalore, Dated 10th Dec 2001

The below mentioned lands specified are required for the State government for establishment a
































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top