IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8th DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NOs.48020-024 OF 2018 AND 48781-785 OF 2018 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN:
1. SRI V ANANTHAKUMAR S/O LATE V VENKATARAMANAIAH AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS 9TH KILOMETRE BADANAGUPPE VILLAGE MYSORE ROAD, CHAMARAJANAGARA – 571313.
2. SMT V REVATHI W/O V ANANTHAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 9TH KILOMETRE BADANAGUPPE VILLAGE MYSORE ROAD CHAMARAJANAGARA – 571313.
3. SRI A SRIGIRI S/O V ANANTHAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS 9TH KILOMETRE BADANAGUPPE VILLAGE MYSORE ROAD CHAMARAJANAGARA – 571313.
… PETITIONERS (By Mr. B V VIDYULATHA, ADV.) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE – 560 001.
2. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BOARD NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BOARD REGIONAL OFFICE METAGALLI INDUSTRIAL AREA, KRS ROAD MYSORE – 570 016.
4. TAHASILDAR CHAMARAJA NAGARA TALUK CHAMARAJA NAGARA DISTRICT.
(By Mr. P V CHANDRASHEKAR, ADV. FOR R2 & 3 Mr. E S INDIRESH, AGA FOR R1 & 4) - - -
… RESPONDENTS THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION DATED 31.10.2009, BENGALURU ISSUED BY THE R-1 UNDER SECTION 28(1) OF KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT ACT 1996 AT ANNEXURE-F TO THE WRIT PETITION IN SO FAR AS THE SCHEDULE LANDS BELONGING TO THE PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED, AND ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Smt.B.V.Vidyulatha, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Mr.P.V.Chandrashekar, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3.
Mr.E.S.Indiresh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 and 4.
2. The petitions are admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same are heard finally.
3. In these petitions, the petitioners inter alia have prayed for a writ of certiorari for quashment of preliminary notification dated 31.10.2009 under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short) as well as a writ of mandamus directing respondent No.4 to delete the name of KIADB in the revenue records.
4. Facts giving rise to the filing of the petitions briefly stated are that petitioner No.1. is the owner of lands in Sy.Nos.427, 438/1, 428/1 and 249/2 measuring 0.10 acres, 1.33 acres, 2.01 acres and 1.03 acres, petitioner No.2 is the owner of the lands in Sy.Nos.438/2, 430/3, 428/2, 431, 439/2 measuring 2.26, 1.19, 2.08, 0.13, 2.06 acres and petitioner No.3 is the owner of the land in Sy.No.429 measuring 0.29 acres. All the aforesaid lands are situated at Badanaguppe Village, Chamarajanagar District.
5. On 31.10.2009, a notification under Section 28(1) of the Act was issued. Thereafter, a final notification was issued on 31.01.2014 under Section 28(4) of the Act. The petitioners challenged the aforesaid notifications before a Bench of this Court in writ petitions inter alia on the ground that while issuing the final notification, their objections were not considered. A Bench of this Court, by an order dated 29.06.2015 quashed the final notification dated 31.01.2014 and remitted the matter to the respondent No.3 for decision afresh. The respondent No.3, by an order dated 09.10.2015 passed under Section 28(3) of the Act, recorded an opinion that the lands of the petitioners should be released from the acquisition.
However, no action in the matter was taken. In the aforesaid factual background, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking the relief as stated supra.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners, while inviting the circular dated 03.03.2007, submitted that since admittedly the petitioners are running industries on the lands in question, therefore, the lands of the petitioners cannot be acquired and despite an order passed by the respondent No.3, no action in the matter has been taken.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 submitted that the respondent Nos.2 and 3 have already forwarded the recommendation to the State Government that the lands belonging to the petitioners shall be released from acquisition. However, the State Government till today has not taken any action in the matter. In response to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the respondent Nos.2 and 3, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that the State Government shall take a decision to release the lands in the light of the circular dated 03.03.2007 and the order passed under Section 28(3) of the Act by the respondent No.3 on 09.05.2015 and pass suitable order within such time as may be fixed by this Court.
8. In view of the aforesaid submissions and in the facts of the case, the petitions are disposed of with a direction to the competent authority of the respondent No.1 to take a decision to release the lands of the petitioners in the light of the circular dated 03.03.2007 as well as the order dated 09.05.2015 passed under Section 28(3) of the Act, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today.
Sd/- JUDGE RV