S. SANDYA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

(BY SRI. G. BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY, ADVOCATE) AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES VIKASA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:50916 WP NO.23150 OF 2022

3. SAMPANGIRAMA NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 001. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, NO.48, 4TH AND 5TH FLOOR, EAST WING, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. REP. BY ITS C.E.O. AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO.48, 4TH AND 5TH FLOOR, EAST WING, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001.

4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND PRESIDENT DISTRICT LAND PRICE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT, RAMANAGARA - 562 159. (BY SRI. RAVINDRANATH B., AGA FOR R1 AND R4; SRI. B.B. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 …RESPONDENTS 2019 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION DATED 13TH NOVEMBER, FINAL NOTIFICATION DATED 06TH JULY, 2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-B ISSUED BY RESPONDENT-AUTHORITIES; DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 01ST APRIL, 2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE RESPONDENT NO.3 VIDE ANNEXURE-F; AND ETC. ANNEXURE-A VIDE AND - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:50916 WP NO.23150 OF 2022 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, petitioners are challenging the Preliminary Notification dated 13th November, 2019 (Annexure- A) and Final Notification dated 06th July, 2020 (Annexure-B) issued by the respondent No.1 for acquiring the subject land belonging to petitioners for the purpose of Industrial Area Development; inter alia sought for direction to the respondent No.3 to consider the representation/objection of the petitioners dated 01st April, 2022 (Annexure-F).

2. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent- Authorities have initiated the acquisition proceedings for acquiring the subject land belonging to petitioners setout at paragraph 2 of the writ petition for the purpose of Industrial Area Development. It is the grievance of the petitioners that the petitioners have opposed the acquisition proceedings on the ground that the petitioners are agreeable for consent award in respect of portion of the land in question. It is stated in the petition that the petitioners have made representation dated - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:50916 WP NO.23150 OF 2022 01st April, 2022 (Annexure-F) to the respondent No.3 contending that the petitioners have constructed residential house in Survey No.29/6 and graves of their ancestors are existing in Survey No.29/3 of Kanchugaranahalli Village, Bidadi Hobli, Ramanagara Taluk and accordingly, sought for dropping of the acquisition proceedings in respect of the aforesaid two items of the subject lands. Hence, this Writ petition, seeking interference of this Court.

3. Heard Sri. Balakrishna Shastry, learned counsel appearing for petitioners; Sri. Ravindranath B., learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 and 4; and Sri. B.B. Patil, learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3.

4. Sri. Balakrishna Shastry, learned counsel appearing for petitioners contended that, the land in question has been sought to be acquired by the respondent-Authorities, however, feasibility of the land in question has not been considered by the respondent-Authorities before initiating the acquisition proceedings. He also submitted that, the petitioners have made representation dated 01st April, 2022 (Annexure-F) to the - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:50916 WP NO.23150 OF 2022 respondent No.3 to drop the acquisition proceedings in respect land bearing Survey Nos.29/6 and 29/3 of Kanchugaranahalli Village, Bidadi Hobli, Ramanagara Taluk, since the petitioners have constructed the residential house and residing in the said houses and graves of their ancestors are existing in the aforesaid two items of the subject land, which requires to be considered in this writ petition.

5. It is also submitted by learned counsel appearing for petitioners that, though the objections have been filed under Section 28(3) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act (for short, hereinafter referred to a 'KIAD Act'), the respondent-Authorities have not considered the same properly. He also invited the attention of the Court to order dated 21st March, 2020 passed by the respondent No.3 insofar as Sl.No.16 and 18 are concerned and submitted that the petitioners have opposed the acquisition proceedings in respect of Survey Nos.29/3 and 29/6 of Kanchugaranahalli Village, Bidadi Taluk, Ramanagara Taluk on the ground that the residential house and graves of their ancestors are existing, however, the respondent No.3-Special Land Acquisition Officer had assessed the objection erroneously with regard to Survey No.29/4 and - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:50916 WP NO.23150 OF 2022 therefore, he submitted that, same is required to be re- considered along with Survey No.29/6 of the Kanchugranahalli Village, Bidadi Hobli, Ramanagara Taluk, wherein petitioners have constructed the residential house and residing in the said house. Accordingly, he sought for interference of this Court.

6. Per contra, Sri. B.B. Patil, learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3 sought to justify the impugned notifications and submitted that the respondent No.3-Special Land Acquisition Officer, after assessing the objection, had passed order dated 21st March, 2020 under Section 28(3) of the KIAD Act. Accordingly, he sought for dismissal of the writ petition. 7 Sri. Ravindranath B., learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 and 4 argued on similar lines.

8. In the light of submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is not in dispute that the respondents have issued Preliminary Notification dated 13th November, 2019 (Annexure-A) under Section 28(1) and Final - 7 - NC: 2024:KHC:50916 WP NO.23150 OF 2022 Notification dated 06th July, 2020 (Annexure-B) under Section 28(4) of the KIAD Act for acquiring various lands including the land belonging to petitioners as setout at paragraph 2 of the writ petition for the purpose of industrial area development. Having taken note of the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, I have carefully examined the procedure adopted by the respondent-Authorities in considering the objection filed by the petitioners for acquisition proceedings in respect of land bearing Survey Nos.29/3 and 29/6 of Kanchugaranahalli Village, Bidadi Hobli, Ramanagara Taluk. The respondent No.3-Special Land Acquisition Officer, had passed order dated 21st March, 2020 under Section 28(3) of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, wherein it is stated that, in Survey No.29/4, the graves of ancestors of the petitioners are existing, however, the case of the petitioners is that the graves of their ancestors are situated at Survey No.29/3 and residential house is constructed in Survey No.29/6. Therefore, I find force in the submission made by learned counsel appearing for petitioners that the objection filed by the petitioners has not been objectively assessed by the respondent No.3 in respect of Survey Nos.29/6, where the - 8 - NC: 2024:KHC:50916 WP NO.23150 OF 2022 residential house has been constructed by the petitioners. In that view of the matter, as the objection filed by the petitioners has not been properly considered by the respondent No.3 in respect of Survey No.29/3 and 29/6 of Kanchugaranahalli Village, Bidadi Hobli, Ramanagara Taluk, I am of the view the petitioners have made out a case for interference to quash the Final Notification dated 06th July, 2020 (Annexure-B) in respect of land belonging to petitioners bearing Survey Nos.29/3 and 29/6 of Kanchugranahalli Village, Bidadi Hobli, Ramangara Taluk and accordingly, the matter is required to be remitted to the respondent No.3 to reconsider the objection filed by the petitioners, seeking dropping of the acquisition proceedings in respect of aforesaid two items of the land in accordance with the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANOTHER vs. BIMAL KUMAR SHAH AND OTHERS reported in 2024 SCC OnLine 968. Accordingly, I pass the following: O R D E R 1) Writ Petition is allowed; 2) Final Notification dated 06th July, 2020 (Annexure-B) issued by the respondent - 9 - NC: 2024:KHC:50916 WP NO.23150 OF 2022 No.1 under Section 28(4) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act in respect of Survey Nos.29/3, 29/4 and 29/6 of Kanchugaranahalli Village, Bidadi Hobli, Ramanagara Taluk is hereby quashed; 3) Respondent No.3-Special Land Acquisition Officer is directed to consider the objection filed by the petitioners dated 01st April, 2022 (Annexure-F) and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law in the light of observation made above. Sd/- (E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK