[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Karnataka Industrial Area Development ... vs Sri G Nanjappa on 18 March, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:16024-DB
WA No. 771 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
WRIT APPEAL NO. 771 OF 2024 (LA-KIADB)
BETWEEN:
KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT
BOARD,
NO.49, KHANIJA BHAVAN,
EAST WING, 5TH FLOOR,
RACE COURSE ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001
BY ITS SLAO.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.K.SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY., SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SRI.H.L.PRADEEP KUMAR., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally
signed by SRI G NANJAPPA
REKHA R S/O LATE GOPALAPPA,
Location: AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
High Court R/AT NALAPPANAHALLI VILLAGE,
of
Karnataka CHANNARAYAPATNA HOBLI,
DEVANAHALLI TALUK,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 101.
...RESPONDENT
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
THE ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION NO.41961/2019
DATED 08.02.2024.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:16024-DB
WA No. 771 of 2024
HC-KAR
THIS WRIT APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)
The present intra Court appeal has been filed
impugning the Order dated 08.02.2024 passed by the Writ
Court in W.P.No.41961/2019, whereby the Final
Notification issued under Section 28(4) of the Karnataka
Industrial Area Development Act, 1966 (for short 'the
KIAD Act') dated 15.11.2018 Gazetted on 13.12.2018 in
so far as petitioner's land is concerned has been quashed
on the ground that the petitioner, the land loser was not
afforded adequate opportunity as provided under Section
28(3) of the KIAD Act.
2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking
before the learned Single Judge.
NC: 2026:KHC:16024-DB
HC-KAR
3. The petitioner's land was part of 70 Acres of
land which was proposed to be allotted in favor of
M/s.Ather Energy Private Limited. Mr.Shashikiran Shetty.,
learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellant -
Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (for short
'the KIADB'), submits that allotment did not take place in
favor of the said Company, and even approval has been
withdrawn vide order dated 14.03.2024, produced as
Annexure-R6 of the Affidavit dated 16.03.2026 filed by the
CEO of the KIADB.
4. This Court vide order dated 02.03.2026,
directed the CEO of the KIADB to furnish entire details of
M/s.Ather Energy Private Limited and therefore, we passed
the following order:
"ORAL ORDER
We direct the learned counsel for the appellant -
KIADB to place on record the application submitted by
M/s.ATHER Energy Private Limited who made an
application to the Single Window Clearance Committee
for allotment of 70 Acres of land.
We direct the KIADB to furnish entire details on
following aspects of the said company and the
NC: 2026:KHC:16024-DB
HC-KAR
application made by the said company for allotment of
huge chunk of land of 70 Acres to it by the KIADB.
(i) The date of incorporation of the said
company.
(ii) The business of the said company
before the application.
(iii) The details of Directors of the
company at the time of incorporation
and at the time of the application.
(iv) The paid-up capital of the company.
(v) The share capital of the company.
(vi) The company returns for the last five
years prior to the date of application.
(vii) The entire copy of the application
which was made by the said
company for allotment of the land in
its favor.
The aforesaid information must be placed on
record by the CEO of the KIADB by filing his personal
affidavit before the next date of posting, failing which,
he shall remain present before this Court.
Post this appeal on 17.03.2026."
5. In compliance of the said order, an affidavit
came to be filed dated 16.03.2026 before this Court.
However, in the said affidavit filed by the CEO,
Dr.Mahesh.M, the desired information was not submitted
and documents were not produced. We found that the
NC: 2026:KHC:16024-DB
HC-KAR
affidavit dated 16.03.2026 was lacking in details as
directed by this Court vide order dated 02.03.2026. We,
vide order dated 17.03.2026 directed Dr.Mahesh.M, CEO
to appear before this Court in person and explain his
conduct in not furnishing the information on affidavit as
ordered by this Court vide order dated 02.03.2026.
6. In compliance of the order dated 17.03.2026,
Dr.Mahesh.M, CEO of the KIADB is present before the
Court. He has also filed further affidavit dated 18.03.2026
furnishing the details as desired vide order dated
02.03.2026. He has also tendered his unconditional
apology for not complying with the order dated
02.03.2026 in its entirety. We accept the unconditional
apology of Dr.Mahesh.M, CEO of the KIADB.
7. The Writ Court has only quashed the
Notification dated 15.11.2018 issued under Section 28(4)
of the KIAD Act, Gazetted on 13.12.2018, so far as the
land of the petitioner is concerned and has directed the
NC: 2026:KHC:16024-DB
HC-KAR
Special Land Acquisition Officer to hear the petitioner and
consider the petitioner's case that he has already put up
construction of house in the property in question and
thereafter, take decision to issue or not to issue Final
Notification so far as the petitioner's land is concerned.
8. We do not think that the order impugned
passed by the learned Single Judge requires an
interference. The learned Single Judge has only directed
the respondents to give an opportunity of hearing as
contemplated under Section 28(3) of the KIAD Act and
thereafter, proceed for issuing Final Notification in
accordance with the law, if required.
9. In view thereof, we dispose of this Writ Appeal
with a direction to the appellant - KIADB to issue notice to
the petitioner and afford an opportunity of hearing as
provided under Section 28(2) and 28(3) of the KIAD Act
and thereafter, take a decision for issuing the Final
Notification under Section 28(4) of the KIAD Act, if
NC: 2026:KHC:16024-DB
HC-KAR
required. The entire proceedings of issuing notice and
hearing should be concluded within a period of two months
from today.
10. With the aforesaid direction/ observation, the
Writ Appeal is disposed of.
11. Pending applications, if any, does not survive
for consideration and the same are disposed of.
Sd/-
(D K SINGH)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(T.M.NADAF)
JUDGE
TKN
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 7
