SRI SANJEEV SIKKA, MEMBER OF SIKKA AND SIKKA FAMILY, REPRESENTING SIKKA N v. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
petition, the writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. In view of the innocuous prayer made in the writ petition, the writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to the respondent/Board to consider the representation given by the petitioners and take a decision and inform the petitioners about the decision taken, as…
Judgment
BETWEEN:
SRI SANJEEV SIKKA, MEMBER OF SIKKA AND SIKKA FAMILY, REPRESENTING SIKKA N SIKKA ENGINEERS PVT LTD, S/O S. B. SIKKA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, HAVING ADDRESS AT NO.34, KRISHNA REDDY LAYOUT, DOMLUR, BENGALURU - 560 071.
SMT. KRISHNA SIKKA, MEMBER OF SIKKA AND SIKKA FAMILY, REPRESENTING SIKKA N SIKKA ENGINEERS PVT LTD, W/O S B SIKKA, AGED ABOUT 92 YEARS, HAVING ADDRESS AT FLAT 'C', SPRING LEAF APARTMENTS, 1ST FLOOR, MUNICIPAL NO.6/3, BRUNTON ROAD, 1ST CROSS, BENGALURU - 560 025. (BY SRI. AJAY J N., ADVOCATE) AND: KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, REPRESENTED BY Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka …PETITIONERS - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2902 WP No. 309 of 2025 CEO AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER, HAVING THEIR OFFICE AT NO.14/3, 2ND FLOOR, R P BUILDING, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.H. L. PRADEEP KUMAR., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DTD.
30.08.2024 (ANNX-A) SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AND THEN PASS NECESSARY INTIMATIONS TO RENDER PLOT NO. 53-A OF BOMMASANDRA INDUSTRIAL AREA SITUATED IN SY.NO.280, 285, 286, AND 303 OF BOMMASANDRA VILLAGE, AT ATTIBELE TALUK, BANGALORE WITHIN A PERIOD OF 30 DAYS FOR ALLOTMENT IN THE NAME OF SIKKA AND SIKKA FAMILY AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER Learned counsel Sri.H. L. Pradeep Kumar, takes notice for Respondent/KIADB. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2902 WP No. 309 of 2025
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the prayer in the writ petition is to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent/Board to consider the representation dated 30.08.2024 at Annexure-A given by the petitioners. Learned counsel submits the petitioners representation have stated that although as per the scheme of amalgamation approved by this Court, M/s Spaceciti Projects merged with Sika Interplant Systems Limited., however, Sri. Sanjeev Sikka is holding 30% of the absolute shares so allotted to M/s Sikka and Sikka Engineers Private Limited. The initial allotment made by KIADB was in favor of M/s. Sikka and Sikka Engineers Private Limited and therefore, the allotment could not have been made to Sika Interplant Systems. Learned counsel submits that it would suffice if the respondent would consider the representation and take a decision accordingly.
Operative part
In view of the innocuous prayer made in the writ petition, the writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to the respondent/Board to consider the representation given by the petitioners and take a decision and inform the petitioners about the decision taken, as expeditiously as possible and at - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2902 WP No. 309 of 2025 any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE AMA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: petition, the writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.