The court upheld the board's statutory authority to resume land allocation due to the petitioner's failure to commence construction and comply with lease conditions.

ORDER :

M. Nagaprasanna, J.

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order dated 12-08-2022 passed by the 3^rd respondent, a notice dated 15-11-2023 issued under Section 34B of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board Act , 1966 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short) by the 5^th respondent and the allotment made in favour of the 6^th respondent in terms of the order dated 12-06-2024. As a consequence thereof, the petitioner seeks restoration of possession of the land in its favour and the lease deed executed thereon.

2. Heard Sri Raghavendra B. Hanjer, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri Mohammed Jaffar Shah, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 and 2, Sri B.B. Patil, learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 to 6 and Sri Shivaprasad Shantanagoudar, learned counsel appearing for respondents 7 and 8.

3. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows: -

The petitioner is said to be a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and is in the business of providing information technology services to several customers enumerated in the petition like Oracle, Microsoft etc. The petitioner desirous of setting up of a Software Development and IT Enabled Services in the IT park area of Hi-tech Defence and Aerospace Park, Devanahalli Taluk which comes under the precincts of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (‘the Board’ for short) submits an application to the State Level Single Window Clearance Committee (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Committee’ for short) of the 1^st respondent. The Committee is said to have approved the request of the petitioner for allotment of 5 acres of land for the establishment as afore-noted in its 99^th meeting and the same is said to have been communicated to the petitioner on 21-04-2017.

4. In terms of the aforesaid clearance by the Committee, the Board issues an allotment letter on 20-05-2017 allotting 5 acres of land on lease basis to the petitioner for a period of 99 years, subject to several conditions in the letter of allotment. The petitioner is said to have paid the entire premium amount on two dates i.e., on 17-05-2017 and 22-08-2017 towards the land cost. The formal communication also emerges from the Board on 29-08-2017 informing that the petitioner can take possession of the land after clearances in terms of the letter of allotment. A possession certificate is also issued on 29-11-2017 in favour of the petitioner. As required under the letter of allotment a lease deed comes to be executed on 18-12-2017 in favour of the petitioner allotting 20235 sq. mts. of land.

5. Two years pass by. A notice comes to be issued on 4-09-2019 calling upon the petitioner to remedy the alleged breaches of the letter of allotment within 90 days of the receipt of the said notice. The petitioner submits its reply and a building plan for approval at the hands of the 4^th respondent and is also said to have requested the complete process to start the project as early as possible. Building plan approval is said to have been kept pending for a long time and after its approval the petitioner in terms of its letter dated 21-06-2022 requests time of 6 to 8 months to execute the work, as there was no construction in the property as was required in the allotment letter. In reply to the request of the petitioner, the Board is said to have directed the petitioner in terms of its communication dated 12-08-2022 to execute the project within nine months, on obtaining approval of the layout plan within th