Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.5251 OF 2024 (LA-KIADB)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI VIJAY KUMAR R.
S/O S.A. RAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS #118, KONAGHATTA BENGALURU RURAL KARNATAKA-561 203.
…PETITIONER (BY SRI CHANDAN GOWDA PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA signed by H REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY K HEMA DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE Location: VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI High Court BENGALURU-560 001.
of Karnataka
2. DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY (INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT).
3. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO.49, 4TH AND 5TH FLOOR, EAST WING KHANIJ BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU-560 001.
4. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-II KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO.39, SHANTIGRAHA BHARAT SCOUTS AND GUIDES BUILDING
4TH FLOOR, PALACE ROAD BENGALURU-560 001.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI NAVEEN CHANDRASHEKAR, AGA FOR R.1, R.2;
SRI SOMASHEKHAR T., FOR SRI B.B. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R.3 & R.4)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR QUASHING THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED UNDER SECTION 28(4) OF THE KIAD ACT, 1966 BEARING NO.CI 17 S.P.Q (E) 2022 DATED 27.02.2O23, ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.2, ENCLOSED AT ANNEXURE-A, IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER CONCERNED, ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. The land of the petitioner has been sought to be acquired for the purposes of respondent No.3 - Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB). After preliminary notification, objections were called for and it is submitted that the petitioner has filed his objections. It is further submitted that mechanically objection has been over-ruled and land of the petitioner has been acquired by way of a final notification. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.
2. Sri.Somashekar.T, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri.B.B.Patil, for respondent Nos.3 and 4 submits that the writ petition may be allowed by setting aside the notification issued under Section 28(4) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (for short 'the Act') and order passed under Section 28(3) of the Act, insofar it relates to the land of the petitioner is concerned and the matter may be remanded back to respondent No.4. In the light of his submission, learned Additional Government Advocate has no objection for the same.
Hence, the following:-
ORDER
i. The writ petition is allowed.
ii. Notification dated 27.02.2023 bearing No. ¹L 17 J¸ï.¦.PÀÆå (E) 2022 issued under Section 28(4) of the Act by respondent No.2 vide Annexure-'A' to the writ petition insofar as it relates to the land of the petitioner is concerned, which is the subject matter of the writ petition is hereby set aside.
iii. Order dated 20.01.2023 bearing No.PÉLJr©/J¯ïJPÀÆå/1535/2022-23 passed under Section 28(3) of the Act by respondent No.4 vide Annexure-'A1' to the writ petition insofar as it relates to land of the petitioner is concerned, which is the subject matter of the writ petition is hereby set aside.
iv. The matter stands remanded back to respondent No.4 to consider the objection filed by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
v. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
