IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 2782 OF 2026 (LA-KIADB)

BETWEEN: GEETHA R.

AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, W/O RAJU R., R/AT NO.96, 1^ST CROSS, RAMAKRISHNA LAYOUT, MALAGALE MAIN ROAD, NAGARABHAVI 2^ND STAGE, BENGALURU NORTH-560091 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VIJAY GOWDA L., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, Digitally signed VIDHANA SOUDHA, by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, COURT OF BENGALURU-560001.

KARNATAKA

2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560001.

3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001.

4. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 009.

5. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (BMICP), KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, 14/3, 1^ST FLOOR, ARAVIND BHAVAN, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001.

6. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-1 (BMICP), KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, 14/3, 1^ST FLOOR, ARAVIND BHAVAN, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001.

7. SMT.MANJULA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, W/O LATE H G SHIVAKUMAR, R/AT HULLIKUNTTE VILLAGE, DODDABELAVANGALA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-561204.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISHA A.S., AGA FOR R1 TO R3;

SRI. H.L. PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R4 TO R6)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.4 TO WITHDRAW THE NOTICE DATED 16.05.2025 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 TO RESPONDENT NO.7/ VENDOR NOTICE BEARING NO.KIADB/LQ/366/2025-26 UNDER SECTION 29(2) OF THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT ACT, 1966, DIRECTING HER TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LAND ADVISORY COMMITTEE IN CONNECTION WITH THE ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D AND ALL CONSEQUENTIAL ACTIONS THERETO, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER ARE CONCERNED AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FRESH MATTERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has sought for issuance of writ of mandamus directing respondent No.4 to withdraw the notice dated 16.05.2025 issued by respondent No.4, which notice has been issued to the vendor of the petitioner. Further, petitioner has sought for consideration of representation at Annexure-E.

2. The facts that are made out are that the petitioner's land is stated to have been notified by virtue of a notification under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (for short 'KIAD Act') on 25.06.2024. Final notification was passed on 18.03.2025. Further, it is submitted that notice has been issued to respondent No.4 under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has purchased the property which is notified by sale deed dated 05.08.2025. Though certain reliefs are sought for in the writ petition, counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner would stand as redressed, if the right of the petitioner for compensation is recognised and appropriate orders are passed by the respondent authority.

4. Learned counsel Sri. H.L. Pradeep Kumar appearing for the respondent-KIADB submits that the prayer in the writ petition appears to be different from the stand taken by the petitioner before this Court at the time of arguments. However, it is submitted if petitioner were to make out appropriate representation making out her claim to the compensation along with relevant documents, same would be considered in accordance with law, subject to however no order already being passed regarding compensation.

5. In light of the limited prayer of the petitioner, petition is disposed of. Petitioner is at liberty to make out representati