Yenkays Engineering Pvt. Ltd. vs Panchayat Development Officer

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 21491

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Jyoti M, J
Yenkays Engineering Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Panchayat Development Officer – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO. 105319 OF 2025 (LB-RES)

Important Points

A local authority lacks legal jurisdiction to issue enforcement notices regarding properties situated within the exclusive designated territory of an Industrial Development Authority, rendering any such notices and subsequent consequential orders invalid as a matter of law.

Subject

Administrative Law - Jurisdiction of Local Authorities

Act Referred

Constitution of India: Art.226, Art.227

Headnote

(A) Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227 - Jurisdiction of local authority - Industrial area - Subjects properties within the jurisdiction of Industrial Areas Development Authority - Gram Panchayat issuing notices - Validity thereof - Held, Gram Panchayat has no legal authority to initiate proceedings or issue notices concerning properties falling under the jurisdiction of the Industrial Development Authority - Notices issued by the Gram Panchayat are invalid, and consequential notices by the Industrial Development Authority based thereon are also set aside.

Facts of the case:
The petitioners, various industrial entities located in an industrial area, challenged notices issued by the local Gram Panchayat and subsequent consequential notices by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Authority. The petitioners contended that since the properties are situated within the industrial area, the Gram Panchayat lacked the jurisdiction or legal authority to issue such notices.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the subject property falls within the jurisdiction of the Industrial Development Authority; therefore, the Gram Panchayat acted without legal authority. Consequently, the notices issued by both the Gram Panchayat and the Industrial Development Authority, being derivative in nature, were found to be invalid.

Issues: Whether the local Gram Panchayat has the legal jurisdiction to issue notices to industrial units falling within the designated area of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Authority.

Ratio Decidendi: An authority lacking jurisdiction over a subject property cannot initiate proceedings or issue valid notices; any subsequent actions based on such invalid foundation are inherently void.

Result: Writ Petition allowed.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Tejpal.A.Kamal
For the Respondents: V.Shivaraj Hiremath (for R1), P.N.Hatti (for R2)

Table of Content
1. petitioners contesting administrative notices issued by the gram panchayat. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. lack of jurisdictional authority renders notices issued by gram panchayat and subsequent proceedings void. (Para 5 , 6)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.

THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

Sri.Tejpal A.Kamal., counsel for the petitioners, Sri.Shivaraj V.Hiremath., counsel for respondent No.1 and Sri.P.N.Hatti., counsel for respondent No.2 have appeared in person.

2. The petition is filed seeking following reliefs:

a. Writ of Certiorari to quash the impugned notice issued by the respondent No.1 under Annexure- B, B1 to B31 Dated 03.06.2024, 25.07.2024, 04.03.2025 and 28.03.2025.

b. Writ of Certiorari to quash the impugned notice issued by the respondent No.2 vide Annexure C, C1 to C26 dated 08.05.2025 and 09.05.2025.

c. Issue a Writ of mandamus and direct respondent No. 1 and 2 to consider representation of the petitioners by issuing revenue records (E-Swattu) as per representation dated 11.09.2024 Vide- Annexure- H.

d. Any other relief deems fit in the circumstances of the case be pleased.

3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the papers with care.

4. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are not pressing prayer No. (c) as of today.

The oral submission is placed on record.

5. The petitioners have approached this Court challenging the notices issued by Respondent No.1 (Gram Panchayat) vide Annexures-B, B1 to B31, and the consequential notices issued by Respondent No.2 (KIADB) vide Annexures-C, C1 to C26.

It is the specific contention of the petitioners that the subject property falls within the jurisdiction of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB), and therefore, the Gram Panchayat has no authority in law to initiate proceedings or issue notices concerning the said property.

The counsel appearing for the Gram Panchayat has fairly conceded the said position.

Upon review of the record and the submissions made by counsel on both sides, it is clear that the subject property falls within the jurisdiction of KIADB. Therefore, the Gram Panchayat lacks the legal authority to initiate proceedings or issue notices concerning the said property. As a result, any actions taken based on such notices are invalid. It is also observed that Respondent No.2 – KIADB issued notices under the Annexures-C series solely based on the notices issued by the Gram Panchayat. Since the foundation - the notices issued by the Gram Panchayat - is unlawfully issued, the subsequent notices by KIADB are also invalid.

6. In view of the above, the impugned notices issued by Respondent No.1 and Respondent No.2 are liable to be quashed.

ORDER

i. The Writ Petition is allowed.

ii. A Writ of Certiorari is hereby issued.

iii. The notices issued by Respondent No.1 vide Annexures B, B1 to B31 and the notices issued by Respondent No.2 vide Annexures-C, C1 to C26 are quashed.