IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S Sunil Dutt Yadav, J
MRS. SHARANYA V – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WP No. 37335 of 2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. initiation of writ petition to quash acquisition notice under the karnataka industrial areas development act. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. right of a title holder to be heard in acquisition proceedings regardless of rtc entries. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. direction to the authority to consider the representation of the title holder. (Para 6 , 7) |
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 08-08-2025 BEARING REF. NO. KIADB/K.R.I.D.E/BHOOSWA/C4/17/080-180/DODDANEKUNDI/ 2/2025-26 (ANNEXURE- A) ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.3, IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondents No.1 and 4. Learned counsel Sri. Gopal V. Bilalmane accepts notice for respondents No.2 and 3.
2. The petitioner has sought for issuance of writ of certiorari to set aside the notice dated 08.08.2025 at Annexure-A which is a notice issued under Section 28(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner has obtained rights through gift deed dated 18.01.2023, notice is issued by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) only to those whose name is entered in the RTC and who are the previous vendors. It is submitted that the petitioner's representation at Annexure-J may be directed to be considered and the petitioner be heard as well.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent - KIADB submits that representation at Annexure-J would be considered and appropriate decision would be taken insofar as the petitioner's representation at Annexure-J.
5. Such representation is directed to be considered as the counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner being the title holder as on the date of preliminary notification requires to be heard in the proceedings.
6. Accordingly, respondent No.3 is directed to consider the representation at Annexure-J and pass appropriate orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.
7. Accordingly, petition is disposed of in terms of the above.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.