Karnataka High Court
M/S.Abhaya Technologies Pvt Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 1 December, 2011
Author: S.Abdul Nazeer
Bench: S. Ablul Nazeer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE e . DATED THIS THE 1°" DAY OF DECEMBER 261 | BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. ABLUL NAZEER WRIT PETITION NO.6344/2010 (LA-KIADB) ~~ Between: M/s Abhaya Technologies Pvis. L td, Reptd. By its Partner, Sri Anjinappa, No.75,. Surveyor Street, Basavanagudi, : Oe Bangalore -- 560 004. Soe a .. Petitioner. (By Sri K.N. Subbaredly & Vivek Reddy, Advs.) And: | The State of Karnataka; _ Rentd. By ite Secretary: De 'partinent of industries, . Vidhaiia Soaudha, . _ Bangalore oh 20° Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board, Re eptd..By its Chief Executive Officer And Executive Member, ; Nrupatisn ga Road, . Bangalore. NO 3 The Deputy Commissioner Acquisition, KIADB, Nrupatunga Road, Bangalore 4 The Special Land Acquisition Offic cer, KIADB, No.3/2, 3™ Floor, Kheni Bldg., Gandhinagar, Bangalore The Executive Engineer, KIADB, Bangalore- Jigani Link Road, Industrial Area, .. Cts, Bangalore. se a és .... Respondents.
a) (By Sri M. Keshava Reddy, AGA for Ri.
Sri PV Chand: rashebhar, Ady. for R2 to. RO).
This Writ Petition | is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, pr raying to ett.
This Wiit Petition ¢ comin gon for Preliminary Hearing in 'B' Group t this iN day, the Court: passed the following:
"ORDER : The petitioner was allotted an industrial plot by the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board ('Board' for short) De "measuring 6508 sq. mtrs. at Bommasandra-Jigani Industrial area, F "Anekal..as per the letter of allotment. at Annexure 'Al' dated G 10.1.2005. The petitioner was put in possession of the said site. a per the possession certificate at Annexure 'A2° dated 28.12.2008, ° The lease-cum-sale deed was also executed by the" Board Vag per Annexure *B' dated 16.2.2006 in favour oP he Bettoier the"
sketch showing the plot in question was attached ue the sae lease- cum-sale deed. The Chief Executive oft Cel (Executive Meriber of the Board has issued a notice at. Anesare a dated 21.7.2008 informing the petitioner that te aie rea vali atted ta the petitioner int aforesaid plot is.testricted 5 5970 £. inns, He was directed to surrender the originat possession coitificate dated 28.2.2005 and to obtain revised. possession certificate for 5970 sq. mtrs of land by contacting Developmeit ottice: IL KIADB Zonal Office, in the K P.Buil idling; N. T.Roe sd, Bangalore. The petitioner has called in ° question t ine validity of the said notice in this writ petition,
2. Sti. Vivek Reddy, learned Counsel appearing for the
-. petitioner submits that the Chief Executive Officer/Executive 7 'Member has no power or authority to modify or rescind the allotment made in favour of the petitioner. It is only the Boaré. or.
its delegatee is authorised to reduce the area as provided 'under *., | Section I4(f)(ii) and (g) of the Karnataka Industrial. Aréas Development Act, 1966 ('Act' for short). The "Chief-Execttive™ Officer/Executive Member has no authority to modify/rescind. the allotment made in favour of the allottees.. -
3. On the other hand: learned' Counsel -appearing for the respondent-Board . has - sought .. fg justify the impugned notice/communications:._ 4, Section 14 of the. Act provides for the general powers of the Board. Sub-section (Di) of Section [4 states that the Board "shall have. the power to modify or rescind such allotments including the right-and power to evict the allottees concerned on reach of any of the terms or conditions of their allotment. Sub- 7 section (g) of Section 14 states that the Board shall have the power "to dele y or specifically to the Executive Member. It is not the case of the Board that the powers have been delegated to the Chief Executive Officer 'or "the oO Executive Member, who has issued the impugned commtinication. Thus, the communication at Annexure: "Pedaied 21.7208 is° without jurisdiction. It is accordingly quashed. The matter "is remitted back to the Board for fresh, consideration "in acecrdance with law after notice to the petitioner The Board is. also directed to hear the petitioner before taking @ decision in terns of this order. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. All contentions on merit are kept open, No costis, ;
Sd/-
JU © BMM/.