Sri. Sahadeva @ Sahadevaiah Vs State of Karnataka

SRI SAHADEVA @ SAHADEVAIAH S/O. LATE KAMBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO. 37, VAJARAHALLI VILLAGE, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562 109.

¶10

SRI NAGARAJU .K S/O. LATE KAMBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO. 19, CHALLEGHATTA VILLAGE, KUMBALAGODU POST, KENGERI HOBLI, BENGALURU DISTRICT-560 060.

¶11

Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

SRI NAGARAJU S/O. KAKAPPA @ RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.26/2, 17^TH MAIN ROAD, 2^ND CROSS, SUBRAMANYA NAGARA, BENGALURU-560021.

¶13

…PETITIONERS

¶14

(BY SRI SRIHARI A.V., ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, VIKASA SOUDHA,

¶17

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:54638 WP No. 24031 of 2025

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

BENGALURU-560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY.

¶20

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD EAST WING, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS

¶21

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.

¶22

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, NO.14/3, 2^ND FLOOR, ARAVIND BHAVAN, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶23

NANDI ECONOMIC CORRIDOR ENTERPRISES LIMITED OFFICE AT NO.1, MIDFORD HOUSE, MIDFORD GARDENS, OFF M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶24

NANDI ECONOMIC CORRIDOR ENTERPRISES LIMITED AT NO.1, MIDFORD HOUSE, MIDFORD GARDENS, OFF M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY.

¶25

(R-5 IS IMPLEADED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 29.10.2025)

¶26

…RESPONDENTS

¶27

(BY SRI RAVINDRA V. REDDY, SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR R-1; SRI VASANTH, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 & R-3; SRI NITIN PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R-4 & R-5)

¶28

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATIONS BEARING NO.CI 196 SPQ 98, BENGALURU DATED 19.12.1998 & NO.CI 196 SPQ 98, BENGALURU DATED 29.01.2023 VIDE ANNEXURES-A & B AND FINAL NOTIFICATIONS BEARING NO.VAAKAI 196 SPG 98 (P), BENGALURU, DATED 08.06.2003 AND NO.VAAKAI 196 SPG 98 (P-II), BENGALURU,

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:54638 WP No. 24031 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

DATED 05.07.2003 VIDE ANNEXURES-C & D RESPECTIVELY ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT IN RESPECT OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY AS THE RESPONDENTS HAVE NOT COMPLETED THE ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS WITHIN REASONABLE TIME INCLUDING PASSING OF THE AWARD AND PAYMENT OF THE COMPENSATION TO THE PETITIONERS AND ETC.

¶32

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

¶33

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶34

ORAL ORDER

¶35

The petitioners have called in question the acquisition preliminary notifications dated 19.12.1998 and 29.01.2023 initiated under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (‘KIAD Act’ for short) and final notifications dated 08.05.2003 and 05.07.2003 initiated under Section 28(4) of the KIAD Act in respect of land, Sy.No.160 measuring 4 acres situated at Kommaghatta Village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru Taluk and District (hereinafter referred to as ‘schedule land’).

¶36

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue involved in this petition is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in Smt. Rathna S. Reddy Vs.

¶37

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:54638 WP No. 24031 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

State of Karnataka and Others¹ (Rathna S. Reddy) ,

¶40

wherein on the ground that no further proceedings pursuant to the final notifications have been proceeded by the authority. This Court has quashed the preliminary notification and the final notification in respect of the petitioner's land therein and the petitioners being similarly placed under the same acquisition, similar order needs to be passed in this writ petition as well.

¶41

Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that in Rathna S. Reddy’s case, the preliminary notification and final notification were quashed on the ground that, despite the prolonged delay of 17 years no further proceedings have been initiated.

¶42

The respondent has not placed any

¶43

distinguishing factor as to how the issue involved in Rathna S. Reddy is not applicable to the present facts.

¶44

1 W.P.No.20824/2025 D.D 05.12.2025

¶45

5 -

¶46

NC: 2025:KHC:54638 WP No. 24031 of 2025

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

The petitioners being similarly placed to that of the Rathna S. Reddy’s case and since there is no steps have been taken by the authority despite lapse of 20 years, this Court pass the following:

¶49

ORDER

¶50

i. The writ petition is allowed .

¶51

ii. Preliminary notifications dated 19.12.1998 and 29.01.2023 initiated under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (‘KIAD Act’ for short) and final notifications dated 08.05.2003 and 05.07.2003 initiated under Section 28(4) of the KIAD Act in respect of land, Sy.No.160 measuring 4 acres situated at Kommaghatta Village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru Taluk and District are quashed .

¶52

Sd/-

¶53

_____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶54

AT/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37

Sri. Sahadeva @ Sahadevaiah v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Sahadeva @ Sahadevaiah v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.R.Muthulakshmi Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt.Rashmi Vasudeva Reddy Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Sunil K Vs State of Karnataka

M/S Samvidhana Cine Combines Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Lakshmamma Vs Deputy Commissioner

Naliniswamy Vs the State of Karnataka