Landowners sought deletion of their dry lands from KIADB acquisition, claiming fertile land and availability of alternate government land. The Government's reasoned rejection, finding lands dry, suitable for industrial layout, and no free government land available, was upheld; writ petition dismissed.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:10573 WP No. 5049 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024 BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
WRIT PETITION NO. 5049 OF 2024 (LA-KIADB)
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
PETITIONER NO. 3 TO 3(D) ARE R/AT 17TH WARD, NEAR GEETHA MANDIRA, BAGEPALLI TALUK, CHICKBALLAPURA DISTRICT-561 207.
9(A) SMT SHIVAMMA W/O LATE SRI. ADINARAYANA REDDY K B, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT KONDAREDDYPALLI , BAGEPALLI TALUK, CHICKBALLPURA DISTRICT-561 207.
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT 17TH WARD, BEHIND PREETHI BAR, BAGEPALLI TALUK, CHICKBALLAPURA DISTRICT-561 207.
BOTH ARE RESISING AT 10TH WARD, Z P ROAD, BAGEPALLI TALUK CHICKBALLAPURA-561 207.
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/AT 13TH WARD, AMBEDKAR NAGAR, BAGEPALLI TQ, CHIKKABALLAPUR-561 207.
PETITIONDERS 16 TO 19 ARE RESIDING AT KONDAREDDY PALLI, BAGEPALLI TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-561 207.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. B.K. CHANDRASHEKAR., ADVOCATE)
AND:
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.MANJUNATHA RAYAPPA, AGA FOR R1
SRI. C. RAMAKRISHNA .,ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A PASSED ON 02/01/2024 ISSUED BY R-1 IN FILE NO. C187-SPA-2021 IN RESPECT OF THE LANDS IN QUESTION BY ALLOWING THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 30/11/2019, 07-08-2021 AND 1- 10-2022 BY DELETING / STATED IN ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
NC: 2024:KHC:10573 WP No. 5049 of 2024
ORDER
"3. Even during the pendency of these writ petitions, the petitioners had made further representations to the State Government to consider the alternative of acquiring other lands which are readily available and to exempt the petitioners' land from the acquisition process. It transpires that the State Government, while taking note of the prayer of the petitioners, has kept the consideration of their applications in abeyance, in view of the present writ petitions pending before this Court and in view of an interim order having been granted in the present petitions.
of acquiring other lands and exempting the land of the petitioners from acquisition. but, however, in view of the pendency of these writ petitions, no further steps have been taken.
approached this court in WP No.3486/2021 challenging the endorsement dated 8.6.2020 and for issuing a direction to the respondents to consider the representation dated 19.10.2019 and legal notices dated 30.11.2019.
disposed of the writ petition by directing the Government
to address the grievance of the petitioners and consider and pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioners' at Annexure-B dated 30.11.2019 and in terms of the order dated 17.09.2012 passed in WP Nos.1627 & 16815-818/2008 without reference to the endorsement at Annexure-C dated 08.06.2020 issued by the KIADB within a period of three months from then.
has considered the representation and has passed the impugned order rejecting the request of the petitioners.
"On perusal of the representation dated 30.11.2019 (Annexure-B) submitted by the Petitioners including other representations, makes it clear that the petitioners sought for
deleting/excluding their lands from the notification on the following grounds:
a) There are other government lands available for notification purpose, the lands of petitioners and others are unsuitable for acquisition to establish an industrial layout as the lands are fertile, the same are not suitable for formation of industrial layout, the same do not in any way benefit the state.
b) The state has to consider for acquisition of other lands which are readily available and exclude/delete the lands of the petitioners.
c) The petitioners are small farmers having a small bit of lands, the income derived from the said lands are the only livelihood to them and their family members.
In order to show that the lands of the petitioners are highly fertile, good yielding lands with any irrigation facility, the petitioners did not produce any material along with
NC: 2024:KHC:10573 WP No. 5049 of 2024
their representation. The copy of the Preliminary notification produced in the file discloses that all the lands acquired by the Board are dry lands (Kushki) which are nearer to the roads, perfectly suitable for formation of industrial layout.
On taking into consideration the nature of the lands and their connectivity to the road including the fertility and suitability for formation of industrial layout, the lands were acquired by the State. The Petitioners did not produce any material to show that the acquired lands are unsuitable for formation of industrial layout.
In the representation the Petitioners had specifically contended that there are other Government lands available for formation of industrial layout. The details of survey numbers, extent and situation of government lands
NC: 2024:KHC:10573 WP No. 5049 of 2024
was not furnished by the Petitioners in their representation. In the absence of such material, the omnibus/bald statement of the Petitioners in respect of the availability of other Government lands within the vicinity of the acquired land appears to be incorrect and improper.
The copy of the Report of the CEO & EM dated 19-12-2022, 29.12.2023 and the copy of report submitted by SLAO-2 in pursuance of the letter dated 29-11- 2022, 02.11.2023 written by Tahsildar, Bagepalli including the village map made available clearly indicates that totally 185 acres 11 guntas bearing Sy. Nos.73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 80, 300 and 314 of Kondareddypalli at Bagepalli Village are Government lands, out of which 76 acres 04 guntas was already allotted to various persons by assigning new survey numbers and the remaining
NC: 2024:KHC:10573 WP No. 5049 of 2024
100 acres 08 guntas of land in the name of Government was the subject matter of acquisition by the State through a separate notification u/s 28(1) of KIAD Act, 1966 dated 11- 12-2009, which is clear from the copy of the notification and map produced in the file. Thereby it is clear that no Government land in Kondareddypalli village abutting to the land acquired by the State is available for acquisition as contended by the Petitioners. Therefore the statement of the Petitioners that several other Government lands available in the said village for notification appears to be mertiless, false liable to be rejected.
The process of acquisition of the lands of the Petitioners was completed. Before issuing final notification, SLAO-1 after hearing the objections of the Petitioners, on taking into consideration several
factors rejected the objections and submitted a proposal for issuing final notification which was accepted and Anal notification was issued. The process of acquisition attains finality. Accordingly the acquired land shall vest absolutely in the State Government free from all encumbrances as per Section 28(5) of the KIAD Act, 1966.
On perusal of the representations of the Petitioners and documents available in the file makes it clear that Petitioners have not shown any bonafide reasons for exclusion/deletion of their lands from acquisition. There are no good grounds made out by Petitioners to consider the request, therefore once again considering the grievance of the Petitioners after issuing final notification is not required."
contention that the lands of the petitioners were fertile
lands and the same were unsuitable for being used for formation of industrial layout has been considered and a clear finding has been recorded that the revenue records indicated that the lands in question were dry lands and the petitioners were also unable to produce any material to show that the lands were unsuitable for formation of industrial layout.
were other Government lands available for acquisition, it has been clearly recorded that there were no Government lands in Kondareddypalli Village and the lands that were available were already been notified.
small farmers and were dependent on the income derived from the lands has also not been established by them by production of relevant materials.
NC: 2024:KHC:10573 WP No. 5049 of 2024
contentions/grievances raised therein have also been addressed, the impugned endorsement cannot be found fault with. Consequently, there is no merit in the present writ petition.
Petition is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/JUDGE
Sk/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Government's rejection order, passed pursuant to a direction to consider representations for deleting lands from acquisition, was sustainable.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
SRI. A THIMMAPPA AND OTHERS
THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES DEPT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD (SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER 1)
N S SANJAY GOWDA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
