ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer:

A. Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the (1) notice bearing no. KIADB/BHUSWA(Da)/M/S.R. PELLETES. Ka. Priv.Li/ Somalapur / 2022-23/269 for Sy no. 118 at Annexure-P (2) notice bearing no. KIADB/BhuSwa (Da)/M/S.R. Pelletes. Ka. Priv. Li/Somalapur/2022- 23/269 for sy.no. 136 at Annexure-P1, (3) notice bearing no. KIADB/ Bhuswa (Da)/Ms/s.R. Pelletes. Ka.Priv.Li/ Somalapur / 2022-23/269 for Sy.No. 137 at Annexure-P2 all dated. 01.08.2025 issued under section 28(2) of the Karnataka industrial area Development Act, 1966 by Respondent no.3 to the petitioner;

B. Issue any other orders or directions as deemed fit in the circumstances.

2. Heard the learned counsel Sri.Shivaprasad Shantangoudar, appearing for the petitioner, learned AGA-Sri.T.Hanumaredy, appearing for respondent No.1, learned Senior Counsel Sri.Basavaraj Sabarad, for Sri.K.L.Patil and Sri.Shanshank Hegde, appearing for respondent No.3 and learned counsel Sri.S.S.Beturmath, appearing for proposed respondent No.4.

3. Facts that relate to the genesis of the company need not bear consideration in the case at hand suffice it to begin with. A preliminary notification that comes to be issued by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Board’) by issuing a notification under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) on 24.02.2022.

4. In furtherance of the said notification on 24.02.2022, another notice comes to be issued on 28.02.2022, inviting objections from the hands of the stakeholders. Thereafter, a notification under Section 28(3) of the Act was issued for acquisition of the lands mentioned in the petition. As per the averments in the petition, it transpires that after the notification was issued under Section 28(3) of the Act, the conversion orders were passed in respect Sy.No.136 and 137, converting agricultural land into non-agricultural purposes, by the Deputy Commissioner and all other statutory clearances are sought.

5. On 09.07.2024, a final notification comes to be issued excluding/dropping Sy.Nos.118, 136 and 137 from the acquisition process, which was initiated in terms of the preliminary notification on 18.02.2022. Long after the issuance of the final notification, it transpires that a fresh notice was issued under Section 28(2) of the Act, calling for objections from the hands of the petitioners and others contrary to the notifications issued earlier. This fresh notice so issued under Section 28(2) of the Act is what drives the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.

6. The learned counsel Sri.Shivaprasad Shantanagoudar submits that once an order dated 28.05.2010 was passed dropping certain survey numbers from the acquisition, it was not open again to the authorities to again issue a notice under Section 28(2) of the Act, but the process altogether had to be re- initiated under Section 28(1) of the Act, by issuance of a fresh notification for such acquisition. Learned counsel would also project several other grounds to demonstrate that the industry is already in existence and therefore the land was appropriately excluded from acquisition.

7. The learned Senior Counsel Sri.Basavaraj Sabarad, appearing for the respondent-Board, places on record an affidavit indicating that the Board would withdraw the notice-impugned. It is the case of the Board that in the Affidavit the said notice under Section 28(2) of the Act, was a mistake on the part of the Board.

8. The affidavit so filed reads as follows:

“I, Dr. Mahesh M. S/o Mahadevaiah, Aged 48 years, CEO & EM, KIADB, Khanija Bhavan, Race Course Road of Bangalore do hereby state on oath as under;

1. I state that, I am the Respondent No.2 in the present matter, I know the facts of the case. Hence, I am swearing to this Affidavit.

2. I state that, the present Petition is filed by the Petitioner