( 1 ) COMMON questions of law fall for consideration in these writ petitions, which shall stand disposed of by this common order.

( 2 ) THE controversy here relates to acquisition of different parcels of land in mysore, nanjangud, devanahalli, anekal and ramanagaram taluks of the state, under the Karnataka industrial areas development Act, 1966. By notifications dated 25th and 29th of october, 1996, the state government gave notice of its intention to acquire a total extent of 263 acres of land in three villages of Mysore and nanjangud taluks in terms of Section 28 (1) of the act. Objections raised by the land owners were considered and overruled culminating in the issue of declarations under Section 28 (4) in respect of an area measuring 255 acres and 18 guntas only. Writ petition nos. 8431, 8643 to 8647, 11974 to 11981, 6220 and 6260 all of the year 1997 challenge the said notifications insofar as the same pertain to an area measuring approximately 40 acres in different survey numbers of bythahalli and thandavapura village.

( 3 ) BY a similar notification, an extent of 315 acres and 20 guntas was notified by the government under Section 28 (1) in four different villages of devanahalli taluk, which included 105 acres and 27 guntas of government land also. Final notification issued under Section 28 (4) is however confined only to 122 acres and 12 guntas of land out of which acquisition of only 3 acres and 3 guntas is under challenge in writ petition nos. 12558 and 25717 of 1995.

( 4 ) IN anekal taluk, by a notification dated 15th of july, 1994, 599 acres of land situate in three villages including 67 acres belonging to the state government was notified for acquisition. Final declaration dated 29th september, 1995 and 22nd of july, 1996 under Section 28 (4) were however made in respect of only 311 acres and 26 guntas of land. The challenge to the said notification in writ petition nos. 38329 and 38330 and 38325 and 38326 of 1995 is limited to an extent of 26 acres of land approximately lying in different survey numbers of yerandanahalli village.

( 5 ) SIMILARLY, in ramanagar taluk, preliminary notifications dated 11th of april, 1996 and 30th of may, 1996 related to 162 acres and 25 guntas of land situate in two villages, but the final declaration under Section 28 (4) was meant only for an extent of 149 acres and 30 guntas. The challenge to the said notifications in writ petition No. 34209 of 1996 is limited to 5 acres and 3 guntas of land situate in three survey numbers of village billakempanahally. It is thus evident that although the notifications in question have acquired vast extents of land in all the taluks mentioned above, the challenge to the said acquisitions is in terms of the area acquired limited to around seventy-five acres only.

( 6 ) COUNSEL appearing for the petitioners have raised several contentions in support of their respective petitions reference whereto shall be made in the course of this judgment. Suffice it to say that the contentions urged broadly speaking raise the following questions for determination leaving apart individual peculiarities in some of the cases, to which I shall make a reference in the course of this judgment. (I) whether an acquisition under the Karnataka industrial areas development act is permissible if such acquisition is meant to or otherwise benefits only a single industrial company or unit; (II) whether acquisitions pursuant to the preliminary notifications issued by the government are without jurisdiction and void for want of proper delegation of authority in favour of the special land acquisition officers concerned; (III) whether final notifications issued by the government under Section 29 (4) are bad for want of satisfaction of the state government as regards the need for acquiring the land mentioned in such notifications; (IV) whether any portion of the lands sought to be acquired falls within the green belt areas identified in the comprehensive developm