The Court quashed a preliminary notification for land acquisition under the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966, issued in 2003 but never finalized, finding it had lapsed due to the passage of 13 years.
Preliminary notification at Annexure-H, in so far as the petitioners lands are concerned, is hereby quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 04th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2016
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.ABDUL NAZEER
WRIT PETITION Nos.20610-20612/2016 & 21299/2016 (LA-KIADB)
BETWEEN:
AND:
2
DEVELOPMENT BOARD (KIADB) REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AT:#49, 4TH & 5TH FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001.
... RESPONDENTS
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS INITIATED PURSUANT TO THE NOTIFICATION DATED 29.1.2003, ISSUED UNDER SECTION 28[1] OF THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT ACT, 1966 [ANNEX-H] STANDS LAPSED IN RESPECT OF LAND BEARING SY.NO.29/5, 31/1, 31/2 OF CHIKKATHOGORU VILLAGE AND LAND BEARING SY.NO.132 OF DODDATHOGORU VILLAGE AND LAND BEARING SY.NO.132 OF
3
DODDATHOGORU VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED UNDER SECTION 28[1] OF THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT ACT, 1966 [AT ANNEX-H].
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
The 1st respondent issued a preliminary
notification under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industries Areas Development Act, 1966 (for short ‘the Act’) for acquisition of the lands described in the first paragraph of the writ petitions for industrial purpose vide notification dated 29.1.2003 at Annexure-H. However, no final notification has been issued in furtherance of the preliminary notification. Therefore, the petitioners have filed these writ petitions for quashing the aforesaid notification.
parties.
4
been issued despite passage of 13 years. This Court in an identical case in relation to the same project in W.P.No.38480/2014 & W.P.No.38937/2014 disposed of on 13.7.2016 - between Dr.N.Lakshmipathi Babu /vs./ Government of Karnataka and others has quashed the preliminary notification on the ground that it has lapsed. A Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.2402/2014 disposed of 12.4.2016 - between The Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board and another /vs./ Smt. Anitha Purnesh and another has upheld the order of the learned Single Judge quashing the preliminary notification.
5
above, IA No.3/2016 is dismissed. No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KLY/
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a preliminary notification for land acquisition issued under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 lapses if no final notification is issued after 13 years.
Whether the preliminary notification should be quashed due to its lapse.
Whether the identical previous decisions of this Court are applicable to quash the notification.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dr.N.Lakshmipathi Babu /vs./ Government of KarnatakaApplied¶35
W.P.No.38480/2014 & W.P.No.38937/2014
The Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board /vs./ Smt. Anitha PurneshApplied¶35
W.A.No.2402/2014
2 provisions across 2 enactments
SRI M.R.R.SETTY
SRI M.R.PRASHANTH
SRI M.R.GOKULA
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD
THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
S.Abdul Nazeer
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
