Ashok B. Hinchigeri, J.

The acquisition of land vide preliminary Notification, dated 2nd June, 2006 and final Notification (declaration), dated 16th August, 2006 under Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (hereinafter called `the KIAD Act' for short) is being assailed in these three petitions. The land in question measures 1 acre 35 guntas at Survey No.41 of Kadubisanahalli Village, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk. The acquisition of the said land is for the benefit of the third respondent.

2. Sri Navkesh Batra, the learned Counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No.15716/06 has urged the following contentions:

(i) There is no valid Notification for bringing Chapter VII of the KIAD Act into force. In the absence of the Notification under Section 1(3) of KIAD Act, resorting to the acquisition proceedings under Section 28 of KIAD Act is bad in law.

(ii)(a) The acquisition of land under the KIAD Act is always for the purpose of establishing an industrial area or estate or for creating an amenity or the industrial infrastructure in the industrial estate to be established. In the instant case, admittedly, the land in question is acquired for housing P.G Block, Electrical Block, Staff Quarters and Boys' Hostel of the third respondent's College. He culls out these particulars from the extract of the proceedings of meeting of State Level Single Window Clearance Committee held on 21.11.2005 (Annexure `J') and the letter, dated 12.12.2005 of Udyog Mitra (Annexure `K').

(ii)(b) Sri Batra submits that the real reasons for resorting to acquisition of lands are only two:

(1) The third respondent's New Horizon College of Engineering is falling short of land requirements, as prescribed by AICTE.

(2) The land in question is abutting the said College; the hutment dwellers and slum dwellers on the land in question and the construction labourers from North India are causing nuisance.

(ii)(c) He also brings to my notice the contents of the petitioner's letter, dated 23rd December, 2005 (Annexure-Z) addressed to the second respondent. The same are extracted hereinbelow:

"Infrastructure: The college has the best infrastructure. The college campus spreads in about 10 acres of land with well structured building, Electrical, Electronics, Computer and Mechanical laboratory block, International Boys and Girls hostels, Canteen, Basketball, Sports ground, Parking Area and a Lawn. As per AICTE norms an Engineering College shall have 10 acres of land for its undergraduate programmes. The college is currently operating on just 10 acres of land Survey Nos. 14(P), 39, 40, 42 Kadubisanahalli, Bangalore East Taluk and is falling just short of the requirement.

Security Threat: The said land Survey No.41 is sandwiched between the college land Survey No.39, 40 and 42. The students are facing constant threats from hart mates and miscreants day in and day out. The hut mates use the open ground as toilets and pollute the environment. The area has become totally unhygienic. We have more than 500 boys and girls staying in the hostel college campus who are, facing threats everyday by the slum dwellers. This land has become a slum where all the construction labourers from North India have come and settled causing nuisance. During night they indulge in all kinds of Anti Social activities. "

The learned Counsel also takes exception to the second respondent's learned Counsel giving the legal opinion that acquisition and development of land for educational and research and development purposes would come within the purview of the KIAD Act. without there being any basis for the same.

(iv) When the Single Window Agency and Karnataka Udyog Mitra turned down the third respondent's application for the acquisition and allotment of the land and as the Revenue Department had the difficulty in granting the permission for converting the lands from agricultural to non-agricultural character, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 have resorted to the compulsory acquisition of la