Allowed

M/S. Vacuum Systems & Products v. Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board

Karnataka HC1 Mar 2023WP/4509/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition challenging the cancellation of an industrial plot allotment. The court quashed the order dated 29.12.2017 because it was passed without issuing a specific notice as required under Section 34B(2) of the KIAD Act, rendering it illegal. The court directed respondents to consider the petitioner's representation before issuing such notice.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order cancelling allotment dated 29.12.2017 is quashed. Respondents directed to consider petitioner's representation for alternative site before issuing notice under Section 34B(2).

M/S. Vacuum Systems & Products Vs Karnataka Industrial… — Landlord and Tenant | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 4509 of 2018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF MARCH, 2023 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 4509 OF 2018 (GM-KIADB)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

M/s. VACUUM SYSTEMS & PRODUCTS V2, CORPORATION, NO.10, KIADB, 14^TH CROSS, 2^ND STAGE, PEENYA INDUSTRIAL AREA, BENGALURU-560 058. REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SRI. VEERBHADRA RAO GUMMADI.

¶7

…PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SRI. AKKAMAHADEVI HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

Digitally signed by GEETHAKUMARI PARLATTAYA S Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶11

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD (KIADB) GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA UNDERTAKING, #49, 4^TH AND 5^TH FLOORS, EAST WING, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001, REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER.

¶12

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD (KIADB) GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA UNDERTAKING, #49, 4^TH AND 5^TH FLOORS, EAST WING, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001, REP. BY SECRETARY-2 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SOMASHEKAR T., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. B.B. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2)

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS/ORDER DATED 29.12.2017 AT ANNEXURE-N PASSED

¶14

¶15

WP No. 4509 of 2018

¶16

BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1, DIRECT THE 1^ST RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 09.08.2017 FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO PAY THE DIFFERENCE AMOUNT AND ALSO FOR ALTERNATIVE PLOT, PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-L AND ETC.,

¶17

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Challenging order dated 29.12.2017 in

¶20

no.KIADB/HO/ALLOT/17287/15468/17-18 vide Annexure-N, passed by respondent no.1 and for a direction to respondent no.1 to consider representation of petitioner dated 09.08.2017 vide Annexure-L, this writ petition is filed.

¶21

Learned counsel for petitioner, submitted that by impugned order vide Annexure-N, allotment of industrial site made to petitioner was cancelled in violation of principles of natural justice and provisions of Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966 ('KIAD Act' for brevity). It was submitted that after allotment, petitioner had paid tentative allotment price. But, before petitioner could establish industry in allotted site, he suffered from ill-health and misfortune in business. It was also submitted that after allotment, land allotted to petitioner was dug up and earth removed leaving pit of 12 to 14 ft. in depth rendering it unsuitable for establishment

¶22

¶23

WP No. 4509 of 2018

¶24

of industry. Therefore, petitioner had also sought for allotment of alternative site. In meanwhile, Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board ('KIADB' for brevity) had increased allotment price unreasonably. While petitioner was agitating it's grievances, impugned order of cancellation was passed illegally and therefore sought for its quashing and also for direction to consider petitioner's application for change of site.

¶25

Learned counsel for respondents submits that insofar as challenge to impugned order of cancellation, matter would be covered by order passed by this Court in W.P.no.940/2023, disposed of on 31.01.2023, wherein cancellation of allotment without issuing specific notice under Section 34B(2) of KIAD Act was held to be untenable. Insofar as representation of petitioner at Annexure-L, it was submitted that same would be considered in accordance with law.

¶26

Heard learned counsel on both side and on perusal of impugned order and annexures, it is seen that in instant case also cancellation of allotment is without issuing specific notice under Section 34B(2) of KIAD Act, which would therefore be illegal. Therefore, impugned order would be unsustainable.

¶27

¶28

WP No. 4509 of 2018

¶29

In view of above, Writ Petition is allowed, impugned order 29.12.2017 in no.KIADB/HO/ALLOT/17287/15468/17-18

¶30

vide Annexure-N is quashed.

¶31

Respondents shall consider representation of petitioner vide Annexure-L before issuing notice under Section 34B(2) of

¶32

KIAD Act in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders.

¶33

In view of disposal of main petition, all pending IAs do

¶34

not survive for consideration.

¶35

Sd/JUDGE

¶36

Psg*

M/S. Vacuum Systems & Products v. Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Vacuum Systems & Products v. Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr Deepak P Devakar Vs Karnataka Medical Council

Sri Channamandappa S/O Late Channappa Vs Sri D M Srinivasagowda

Prasanna @ Prasanna Kumar Vs Lingamma

Ms C Uma Chandrashekar @ Uma Vs the Karnataka Bank Ltd.

Sri Muniyappa Vs M Narayanaswamy

M Lakshmanaramaiah Vs Ramappa