Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Karnataka Industrial Areas Vs Union of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

Home
Karnataka HC
2025
Karnataka Industrial Areas Vs Union of IndiaKarnataka Industrial Areas v. Union of India

Disposed¶49

Karnataka Industrial Areas v. Union of India

Karnataka HC5 Nov 2025WP/23232/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

KIADB vs Union of India Ministry of Power, Rural Electrification Corporation Ltd, REC Transmission Projects Company Ltd, L&T Infrastructure Development Projects Ltd, Kudgi Transmission Ltd; writ petition under Articles 226/227 Constitution and concerning areas designated under the KIAD Act, 1966; subject: transmission towers and electric/transmission lines through Vasanthanarsapura Industrial Area, Tumakuru; interim order 01.06.2017; companion petition W.P.No.2318/2017; towers erected, lines operationalised after due process involving petitioner; petition disposed of, no report directed, no prejudice to surviving causes; advocates B B Patil, H. Jayakara Shetty (CGC), N. Udaya Kumar, I. S. Devaiah; Justice B M Shyam Prasad; dated 05.11.2025; NC 2025:KHC:44623.

What did the court decide?

If the towers are erected and the transmission lines are in operation over years, the writ petition must be disposed of in the light of that position.

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents could locate transmission towers and draw electric/transmission lines through the petitioner's developed Vasanthanarsapura Industrial Area in Tumakuru, with prayers for restraint, rerouting, compensation and prior consultation. +1 more

Court's answer

If the towers are erected and the transmission lines are in operation over years, the writ petition must be disposed of in the light of that position.

Ratio / Principle

There is no need for the report sought before disposal, because there is no cause for the same.

Key takeaways

The disposal cannot prejudice any cause that may be available to the petitioner.obiter¶49

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (Bengaluru), single Bench of B M Shyam Prasad, J.; W.P. No. 23232 of 2017 (GM-RES), decided 05.11.2025 (NC: 2025:KHC:44623). The Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board, which developed the Vasanthanarsapura Industrial Area in Tumakuru, had filed this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking restraint on placement of electric lines/transmission towers in its industrial areas, rerouting, compensation, and prior consultation before erection in areas designated under the KIAD Act, 1966. An interim order had been granted on 01.06.2017, referring to W.P.No.2318/2017, which was disposed of on a report that the towers were commissioned and lines operationalised after due process involving the petitioner. Recording counsel's admissions that the towers are erected and the transmission lines operational over years, the Court disposed of the petition holding that no report was needed as there was no cause for it, and that the disposal cannot prejudice any cause available to the petitioner.

A

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:44623 WP No. 23232 of 2017

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

WRIT PETITION NO. 23232 OF 2017 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, 4 TH AND 5TH FLOOR, EAST WING, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA 560001, REP BY ITS SECRETARY

…PETITIONER

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

(BY SRI. B B PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF POWER, SHRAM SHAKTI BHAWAN, RAFI MARG,

NEW DELHI 110001

REP BY IT UNDER SECRETARY

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:44623 WP No. 23232 of 2017

HC-KAR

RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD CORE-4, SCOPE COMPLEX, 7, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI 110003,

REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR

RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION TRANSMISSION PROJECTS COMPANY LTD, CORE-4, SCOPE COMPLEX, 7, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI 110003,

REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR

L & T INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS LIMITED ( L & T IDPL), L&T CAMPUS, TCTC BUILDING,

FIRST FLOOR,

MOUNT POONAMALLEE ROAD, MANAPAKKAM, CHENNAI 600089, REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER

KUDGI TRANSMISSION LTD P.O. BOX 979, MOUNT POONAMALLEE ROAD, MANAPAKKAM, CHENNAI 600089,

REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. H. JAYAKARA SHETTY, CGC FOR R1;

SRI. N. UDAYA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3;

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:44623 WP No. 23232 of 2017

HC-KAR

SRI. I. S. DEVAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R5)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO RESTRAIN THE RESPONDENTS FROM PLACING ANY ELECTRIC LINES OR TRANSMISSION TOWERS IN THE PETITIONER'S INDUSTRIAL AREAS AT KEMPANHALLI, SOMSAGAR, NELAHAL, GIRIYANAHALLI, P.FOLARHALLI & LINGANAHALLI VILLAGE AT ANNEX-A; DIRECT R-2 TO 5 TO REROUTE THE PLACING OF ELECTRIC LINES AND TRANSMISSION TOWERS KEEPING IN MIND THE PETITIONER'S REQUIREMENT FOR ELECTRICITY FOR THE PETITIONER'S INDUSTRIAL AREAS; IN THE ALTERNATIVE DIRECT R-2 TO 5 TO PAY THE COMPENSATION AS DETERMINED BY THE PETITIONER; DIRECT R-2 TO 4 TO CONSULT THE PETITIONER PRIOR TO ERECTION OR PLACING OF ANY ELECTRIC TOWERS, LINES, HT LINES, OR TRANSMISSION LINES IN THE AREAS DESIGNATED AS INDUSTRIAL AREAS UNDER THE KIAD ACT, 1966.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:44623 WP No. 23232 of 2017

HC-KAR

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner, which has developed an Industrial Area known as Vasanthanarsapura Industrial Area in Tumakuru, is aggrieved by the respondents' decision to locate certain towers and draw transmission lines through this Industrial Area. This Court, on 01.06.2017, has granted interim order referring to the interim order granted in another petition in W.P.No.2318/2017. Admittedly, this writ petition in W.P.No.2318/2017 is disposed of in the light of the report filed that the respondents have commissioned the towers and operationalised the transmission lines after due process involving the petitioner.

Mr. I. S. Devaiah, the learned counsel for the fourth

and the fifth respondents, reiterates on instructions that the transmission lines have already been operationalized and again after involving the petitioner. Mr. B. B. Patil, the learned counsel for the petitioner, does not dispute that the towers are erected and the transmission lines are in

5 -

NC: 2025:KHC:44623 WP No. 23232 of 2017

HC-KAR

operation, but the learned counsel makes a request for filing a report before the petition stands disposed of.

However, this Court is of the view that if the towers are erected and transmission lines are in operation over years as it is now stated, the petition must be disposed of in the light of the afore, and insofar as the report, there is no need for the same because there is no cause for the same. This Court opines that this disposal cannot prejudice any cause that may be available to the petitioner. The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

Sd/(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

RB

Issues for consideration

2 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the respondents could locate transmission towers and draw electric/transmission lines through the petitioner's developed Vasanthanarsapura Industrial Area in Tumakuru, with prayers for restraint, rerouting, compensation and prior consultation.medium confidence¶42
The court held
If the towers are erected and the transmission lines are in operation over years, the writ petition must be disposed of in the light of that position.ratio¶49
2.
Whether a report was required before the petition stood disposed of, given that the towers are erected and the transmission lines are operational, and whether disposal would prejudice the petitioner.¶48
The court held
There is no need for the report sought before disposal, because there is no cause for the same.ratio¶49

Cases cited

Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority

AI extract

W.P.No.2318/2017Referred¶42

Statutes considered

3 provisions across 2 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226¶35 Article 227¶35
Karnataka Industrial Areas Development ActTHE KIAD ACT, 1966¶35

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Respondents' decision to locate certain transmission towers and draw transmission lines through the petitioner's Vasanthanarsapura Industrial Area in Tumakuru (no formal order of a lower forum identified).¶42
Prior proceeding
This Court granted an interim order on 01.06.2017 in this petition, referring to the interim order granted in W.P.No.2318/2017.¶42
Prior proceeding
Companion petition W.P.No.2318/2017 stood disposed of in light of a report that the respondents commissioned the towers and operationalised the transmission lines after due process involving the petitioner.¶42
Prior proceeding
At hearing, counsel for R4-R5 reiterated on instructions that the transmission lines had been operationalized after involving the petitioner; counsel for the petitioner did not dispute that towers are erected and lines in operation, but sought leave to file a report.¶44

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD¶9
B B PATIL
respondent
UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF POWER¶14
H. JAYAKARA SHETTY
respondent
RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD¶19
N. UDAYA KUMAR
respondent
RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION TRANSMISSION PROJECTS COMPANY LTD¶21
N. UDAYA KUMAR
respondent
L & T INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS LIMITED (L & T IDPL)¶23
I. S. DEVAIAH
respondent
KUDGI TRANSMISSION LTD¶26
I. S. DEVAIAH

Coram

AI extract

B M SHYAM PRASADauthor¶37

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Karnataka HC
Decided on: 5 Nov 2025 · November
Registered: 30 May 2017
Case no.: WP/23232/2017
CNR: KAHC010336312017
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: B M Shyam Prasad
Disposal: DISPOSED
Case type: WRIT PETITION (GM-RES)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from B M Shyam Prasad

Ms. Gayathri Vs the Registrar General
4 Nov 2025
M/S Sri Guru Transport Vs the State of Karnataka
4 Nov 2025
M D Ashraf Vs Union of India
4 Nov 2025
Sanam Vs State of Karnataka
5 Nov 2025
M/S Sree Gokulam Chit and Finance Co. Pvt. Limited Vs the National Co-Operative Bank Limited
5 Nov 2025
Nisarga Gowda Vs the State of Karnataka
5 Nov 2025

Cite this judgement

Karnataka Industrial Areas v. Union of India, WP/23232/2017 (KA), decided on 5 November 2025.

The High Court of Karnataka publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Cases cited1

W.P.No.2318/2017Referred¶42

Open Authorities

Statutes3

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226 · Article 227
Karnataka Industrial Areas Development ActTHE KIAD ACT, 1966

View all statutes

Procedural history4

Respondents' decision to locate certain transmission towers and draw transmission lines through the petitioner's Vasanthanarsapura Industrial Area in Tumakuru (no formal order of a lower forum identified).
This Court granted an interim order on 01.06.2017 in this petition, referring to the interim order granted in W.P.No.2318/2017.
Companion petition W.P.No.2318/2017 stood disposed of in light of a report that the respondents commissioned the towers and operationalised the transmission lines after due process involving the petitioner.

View full history

Bench / Coram

B M SHYAM PRASAD

Parties & counsel