Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Smt. Lakshmamma, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of the preliminary notification dated 21-07-1999 issued under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (KIAD Act), insofar as it pertained to her land. The respondents were the State of Karnataka, the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (KIADB), and its Special Land Acquisition Officer. The petitioner's counsel submitted that the matter could be disposed of in terms of an earlier order passed in W.P. No.11839/2014 on 10-04-2014, which was affirmed by the Division Bench in W.A. No.2402/2014, whereby the same preliminary notification dated 21-07-1999 was quashed. It was not disputed that the petitioner's land was part and parcel of the lands notified for acquisition under that notification. The court, after hearing the counsel for both sides, allowed the writ petition in terms of the earlier order, quashing the preliminary notification insofar as it concerned the petitioner's land. The court directed that the petitioner be entitled to all consequential benefits arising from the quashing.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Preliminary Notification - Quashing - Section 28(1) of Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 - The petitioner sought quashing of preliminary notification dated 21-07-1999 issued under Section 28(1) of the KIAD Act, 1966, for acquisition of her land. The court held that since the petitioner's land was part of the same notification that was already quashed in W.P. No.11839/2014, affirmed in W.A. No.2402/2014, the petition was allowed in terms of the said order. (Paras 2-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the preliminary notification dated 21-07-1999 issued under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966, insofar as it pertains to the petitioner's land, should be quashed in light of an earlier judgment quashing the same notification for other lands.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed in terms of the order dated 10-04-2014 passed in W.P. No.11839/2014, which was affirmed by the Division Bench in W.A. No.2402/2014. The preliminary notification dated 21-07-1999 issued under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966, insofar as it pertains to the petitioner's land, is quashed. The petitioner is entitled to all consequential benefits.
Law Points
- Acquisition proceedings can be quashed if covered by a prior judgment
- Preliminary notification under Section 28(1) of KIAD Act
- 1966 can be set aside if similar lands were already quashed
- Writ petition can be disposed in terms of earlier order if facts are identical
Case Details
2020 LawText (KAR) (07) 122
W.P.No.8070/2020 (LA-KIADB)
Sri A Nagarajappa (for petitioner), Smt. Kavitha H.C (HCGP for R1), Sri Vijaya Kumar H.Patil (for R2 & R3)
The State of Karnataka, The Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board, The Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (Special Land Acquisition Officer)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging a preliminary notification for land acquisition under the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the preliminary notification dated 21-07-1999 issued under Section 28(1) of the KIAD Act, 1966, insofar as it pertains to the petitioner's land.
Filing Reason
The petitioner's land was notified for acquisition under the same preliminary notification that had been quashed in an earlier writ petition (W.P. No.11839/2014) affirmed by the Division Bench.
Previous Decisions
W.P. No.11839/2014 was allowed on 10-04-2014 quashing the preliminary notification dated 21-07-1999, and the same was affirmed by the Division Bench in W.A. No.2402/2014.
Issues
Whether the preliminary notification dated 21-07-1999 under Section 28(1) of the KIAD Act, 1966, insofar as it pertains to the petitioner's land, should be quashed in light of the earlier judgment in W.P. No.11839/2014.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner's counsel submitted that the writ petition could be disposed of in terms of the order passed in W.P. No.11839/2014 dated 10-04-2014, which was affirmed by the Division Bench in W.A. No.2402/2014, quashing the same preliminary notification.
It was not disputed that the petitioner's land was part and parcel of the lands notified for acquisition under the said notification.
Ratio Decidendi
Where a preliminary notification for land acquisition under the KIAD Act has been quashed by a court in respect of certain lands, and the petitioner's land is part of the same notification, the petitioner is entitled to the same relief and the notification must be quashed insofar as it pertains to the petitioner's land as well.
Judgment Excerpts
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Bank.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the instant Writ Petition could be disposed off in terms of the order passed in Writ Petition No.11839/2014 on 10-04-2014 which came to be affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.2402/2014, by virtue of which the preliminary Notification dated 21-07-1999 came to be quashed.
It is not in dispute that the lands of the petitioner are also part and parcel of the lands notified for acquisition.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed W.P. No.8070/2020 under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of the preliminary notification dated 21-07-1999. The matter came up for preliminary hearing on 01-07-2020 before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru. The court heard the counsel for the petitioner and the respondents. The petitioner's counsel relied on the earlier order in W.P. No.11839/2014 dated 10-04-2014, which was affirmed in W.A. No.2402/2014, quashing the same notification. The court allowed the petition in terms of the earlier order.
Acts & Sections
- Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966: 28(1)
- Constitution of India: 226, 227
