Point of Law: An argument to contrary blurs boundary lines of schemes of acquisition envisaged under these statutes and thus, runs counter to scope of section 28 of 1966 Act.

ORDER :

1. Petitioner is knocking at the doors of writ Court for assailing the acquisition of his land admeasuring 2 Acres-0 Guntas in Sy. No. 176 of Bagaluru Village, Yelahanka Taluk, in Bengaluru Urban District, vide Final Notification dated 10.10.2022 issued by the 1st Respondent-State under section 28(4) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 at Annexure-A. He has also sought for the quashment of Notification dated 10.08.2022 issued u/s 3(1) of the 1966 Act at Annexure-B whereby the area in which the subject land is subsumed has been declared to be an industrial area.

2. After service of notice, the 1st Respondent-State has entered appearance through the learned AGA; the Respondent-KIADB and its officials are represented by their Sr. Panel Counsel and they have filed the Statement of Objections & Addl. Statement of Objections resisting the Writ Petition.

3. THE FOUNDATIONAL FACTS OF THE CASE:

(i) Petition property is a ‘granted land’ and not the one bought by the grantee by his toil. The grantee was subject to certain terms and conditions that are reflected in a copy of the document at Annexure-A. After the death of original grantee, his widow Smt. Chikkamuniyamma succeeded to the estate, and after her demise, Petitioner claims succession thereto.

(ii) Earlier, the petition land along with many other was proposed for acquisition vide Preliminary Notification dated 16.12.2006 followed by the Final Notification dated 09.04.2008, by referring to Sy. No. 177 when it was Sy. No. 176. Joint measurement was undertaken followed by taking over of entire area comprised in the Notifications including the said land. There was some official correspondence between KIADB and the revenue officials about the discrepancy as to the survey number in which the petition land is situate. However, the lands were dropped from acquisition vide Notification dated 04.12.2010. Way back in 2013, Smt. Chikkamuniyamma being the khatadar of the land, in response to Tahasildar’s notice, has requested the KIADB for the payment of compensation since possession of the land was already taken over.

(iii) The acquisition under the earlier Notifications of huge extent of about 200 Acres of land was for the purpose of a hardware park project. Petition land is a small bit compared to the rest and the same is subsumed in the subject industrial area. Because of the discrepancy, as already mentioned above, it was de-notified and therefore, its designation as part of industrial area u/s 3 and its acquisition u/s 28 have been made afresh vide impugned Notifications.

(iv) Petitioner seeks to falter the same on the grounds that: designation of the subject land as an industrial area and its fresh acquisition are contrary to law; the Notifications have been issued in the name of deceased mother; the entire exercise was bona fide and smacks of legal malice; the act of the respondents is discriminatory of the petitioner; the acquisition is not for the public purpose but to feed the requirement of a private software company...... i.e. M/s. Nethra Software Technologies Ltd which gained allotment even before acquisition process. Counsel for the petitioner has passionately argued the matter placing reliance upon certain Rulings. The KIADB having filed its Statement of Objections and Addl. Statement of Objections, resists the Writ Petition; its Senior Panel Counsel made submissions with equal passion in justification of the impugned Notifications.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition papers, this Court declines indulgence in the matter for the following reasons:

(a) Petition property as already mentioned above is only a ‘granted land’ and not the one bought by the grantee by his toil. Although a government grant feeds the title, law recognizes a certain difference between a ‘granted land’ and a ‘private property’. The difference in degrees of ownership that lies between a ‘granted land’ and a private land assumes significance