Karnataka High Court
M Mahesh Reddy vs Chief Executive Officer on 22 January, 2025
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
1
Reserved on : 13.12.2024
Pronounced on : 22.01.2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION No.14732 OF 2022 (GM - KIADB)
C/W
WRIT PETITION No.55481 OF 2017 (GM - KIADB)
IN WRIT PETITION No.14732 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
M. MAHESH REDDY
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS.
NO.53, 5TH A CROSS
21ST MAIN, MCHS COLONY
BTM 2ND STAGE
BENGALURU - 560 076.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI MAHESH A.S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS
DEVELOPMENT BOARD
NO.49, 4TH AND 5TH FLOORS
2
'EAST WING', KHANIJA BHAVAN
RACE COURSE ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 001.
... RESPONDENTS
(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 MODIFY THE IMPUGNED SKETCH (ANNEXURE-F) IN RELATING
TO PLOT NO.1A AT VEERASANDRA INDUSTRIAL AREA AND BRING
IT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE ACQUISITION OF LANDS MADE BY
THE RESPONDENT FOR THE FORMATION OF THE SAID INDUSTRIAL
AREA, BY ISSUING A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT
OR ORDER IN THE NATURE OF A WRIT.
IN WRIT PETITION No.55481 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
SAGE ENTERPRISES
A PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING
ITS PRESENTLY AT:
NO.325, 8TH CROSS, HAL 2ND STAGE
INDRA NAGAR,
BENGALURU - 38.
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER
DR.N.SAILESWARAN
S/O K.T.S. NAGAMANICKAM
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.8/1,
GANDHI ROAD,
SALEM - 636 007.
TAMILNADU.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI HAREESH BHANDARY T., ADVOCATE)
3
AND:
1. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA
DEVELOPMENT BOARD (KIADB)
2ND FLOOR, R.P BUILDING
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 01
REPRESENTED BY ITS
EXECUTIVE MEMBER.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
KIADB, NO.14/3, KIADB, 2ND FLOOR
R.P.BUILDING,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 01.
3. SECRETARY -3
KIADB, NO.14/3, KIADB
2ND FLOOR, R.P.BUILDING,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 01.
4. DEVELOPMENT OFFICER AND
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER-II
KIADB, NO.14/3, KIADB
2ND FLOOR, R.P.BUILDING,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 01.
5. ASST.EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
AND DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
KIADB, NO.14/3, KIADB
2ND FLOOR, R.P.BUILDING,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 01.
6. SURVEYOR AND ASST.ENGINEER
KIADB, NO.14/3, KIADB
4
2ND FLOOR, R.P.BUILDING,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 01.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI B.R.SRINIVASA GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 AND R-3;
SRI H.L.PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-2, R-4 TO R-6)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER OF THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITY DTD 14.11.2017 VIDE
ANNEXURE-S; DIRECT THE R-1 TO EXECUTE THE SALE DEED TO
THE REMAINING EXTENT OF LAND OUT OF 9992 SQ.MS. TO THE
EXTENT OF LAND AVAILABLE IN 5870 SQ.MS BY FIXING THE
BOUNDARIES AND EVICTING THE ENCROACHERS AS PER THE
STATEMENT VIDE ANNEXURE-P SERIES.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 13.12.2024, COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CAV ORDER
The petitioner in W.P.No.14732 of 2022 seeks modification of
the impugned sketch relating to Plot No.1A of Veerasandra
Industrial Area to bring it in conformity with the acquisition of land
made by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board ('the
5
Board' for short). Petitioner in W.P.No.55481 of 2017 prefers the
petition calling in question an order of the Board dated 14-11-2017
which denies registration of sale deed and has sought consequential
direction by issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to the
Board to execute the sale deed of the remaining extent of land as
obtaining in the prayer. Since both these petitions relate to the
very piece of land, they are taken up together and considered by
this common order.
2. Heard Sri A.S. Mahesh, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner in Writ Petition No.14732 of 2022,
Sri T. Hareesh Bhandary, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner in W.P.No.55481 of 2017; Sri H.L. Pradeep Kumar,
learned counsel appearing for respondent in Writ Petition No.14732
of 2022 and respondent No.2, 4 to 6 in Writ Petition No.55481 of
2017, and Sri B.R. Srinivasa Gowda, learned counsel appearing for
respondents 1 and 3 in Writ Petition No.55481 of 2017.
6
3. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows;-
WRIT PETITION NO. 14732 OF 2022:
The petitioner claims to be the owner of gramatana land
bearing Kaneshmari Nos. 61 and 62 measuring 44,200 sq.ft. and
Kaneshmari No.65/A measuring 20,000 sq.ft. both situated in
Veerasandra Village, Attibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru
District. On 28-02-1981 the Board issues a preliminary notification
for acquisition of lands in Attibele Hobli for the formation of
Veerasandra Industrial Area which included 4.02 acres of
gramatana lands. In those 4.02 acres fell the property of the
petitioner. On 22-08-1981, six months thereafter, the said
gramatana lands were excluded from acquisition. The excluded
lands from acquisition included the lands of the petitioner.
Therefore, it is the averment in the petition that the lands of the
petitioner were never a part of Veerasandra Industrial Area. It is
the further averment in the petition that the Board prepares a
sketch of the Industrial Area in which formation of plot 1A was
shown to be Sy.Nos. 17, 18 and 19 which included portion of the
land of the petitioner, notwithstanding the fact that it was never a
7
part of acquisition. When things stood thus, the National Highway
Authority of India issues a notification for acquisition of lands for
widening of the road. A portion of the property in Kaneshmari Nos.
61 and 62 was notified for acquisition. The sketch prepared by the
Board, according to the petitioner, is erroneous on a plain
comparison of village map of Veerasandra village and the sketch of
Veerasandra Industrial Area. The petitioner then claims to have
submitted several representations seeking modification of the
sketch of Veerasandra Industrial Area, to show that Plot No.1A was
wrongly shown as acquired property, notwithstanding it being given
up from acquisition. It is this prayer that is sought in the petition.
WRIT PETITION NO. 55481 OF 2017:
This writ petition springs from the said property of
Veerasandra Industrial Area Plot No.1A. This is provisionally
allotted to the petitioner on 13-07-1981 and confirmatory letter was
also issued on 24-11-1981. The petitioner is said to have then
requested eviction of few families which were in the industrial
estate and several litigations that galore which form part of the
pleadings in the petition. A representation is made in the year
8
2017, in particular on 07-07-2017, requesting execution of a sale
deed of an allotment that took place in the year 1981 and for
possession certificate issued thereon. The representation submitted
met its consideration on 14-11-2017 and a joint inspection was
sought to be conducted to fix the boundaries and the result was
resumption of entire land measuring 9992 sq.mts. which was
allotted to the petitioner in the year 1981. Therefore, the aforesaid
prayer in this petition.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in
W.P.No.14732 of 2022 would vehemently contend that his property
was initially notified but subsequently dropped from acquisition
proceedings. The present petitioner's father had purchased the
property in question and the petitioner had succeeded to the
property, all of which have happened pursuant to dropping of land
from acquisition. Therefore, he would submit that the question of
his right to property would be violated if the sketch is not altered by
the Board. The learned counsel for the petitioner in the companion
petition W.P.No.55481 of 2017 would contend that he has been
allotted the property by the Board. Therefore, a sale deed must be
9
executed in his favour. The order of resumption of the property
that was allotted to the petitioner is, on the face of it, erroneous.
He would submit that correspondences between the petitioner and
the Board galore, as the Board did not bother to evict persons who
were in unauthorized occupation of the land which was allotted to
him. Therefore, it has taken close to 35 years to complete the
process of allotment.
5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the Board
would now submit that the land of the petitioner in Writ Petition
No.14732 of 2022 was not included in the acquisition out of
inadvertence and one Sri B.A. Ramakrishna Shetty has received
compensation for the land but would admit that he has no
document to show that the said Ramakrishna Shetty had been paid
the compensation. He would contend that the petitioner in the
companion petition has no right to claim the land, as the conditions
of allotment are not even fulfilled by the petitioner. Therefore, he
would seek dismissal of both these writ petitions.
10
6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions
made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the
material on record.
7. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The Board in
the year 1981 takes up the issue of acquisition of lands in the
aforesaid area by issuance of a preliminary notification which
included a proposal of 4.02 acres of gramatana land of Veerasandra
Village of Anekal Taluk. The preliminary notification dated
28-02-1981 reads as follows:
"KARNATAKA GAZETTE, MARCH 5, 1981
NO.CI 157 SPQ 80 DATED 28th February 1981.
WHEREAS the Government of Karnataka is of the opinion
that the lands specified in the schedule below are required for
development by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development
Board for the establishment of industries therein.
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by
sub-section (1) of section 28 of the Karnataka Industrial Areas
Development Act 1966, (Act No.18 of 1966) the Government of
Karnataka hereby gives notice of its intention to acquire the said
lands.
All persons interested in the said lands are hereby warned
not to obstract or interfere with any persons entering upon such
lands for the purposes specified in section 35 of the said Act.
Any contract for, the disposal of the said lands by sale, lease,
mortgage, exchange or otherwise or any outlay or
improvements made therein without the sanction of the
Assistant Commissioner, Doddaballapur Sub-Division,
11
Bangalore after the date of publication of this Notification will
under section 24 (clauses 7) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
(Central Act 1/1894) as amended by Karnataka Act, 17/1961,
read with Section 30 of the Karnataka Industrial Areas
Development Act, 1966, be disregarded by the officer assessing
compensation for such parts of the lands as may be finally
acquired.
A plan of the lands is kept in the office of the Assistant
Commissioner, Doddaballapur Sub-Division, for inspection.
SCHEDULE
Village-Veerasandra Hobli-Attibele Taluk-Anekal District-Bangalore
Name of the Name of Boundaries
Khatedar the East West North South
Sl. NO.
Approximate
Assessment
Anubhava
Sy. NO.
Kind
required
dar
Area
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Rs. Ps.
1 Muniswamy bin Muniswamy Khuskhi 19/1 Sy.No.20 Sy.No.17 Sy. Nos. NH 7 3-09 4 - 71
Munilingaiah 18 and Bangalore
25 Hosur
Road
2 Sharadamma W/o Sharadamma Dry 19/2 " " " " 1-03 1-59
N.Ramachandra
3 " " " 19/3 " " " " 1-09 1-81
4 Mohammed Yakub Mohammed " 19/4 " " " " 0-22 0-81
Sait Yakub Sait
5 Sharadamma W/o Sharadamma " 20/1 Sy. Nos. Sy. Nos. Sy. Sy. No.19 2-00 2-69
N.Ramachandra 21, 22 19, 25, No.23
24
6 " " " 20/2 " " " " 1-32 2-60
7 H.Manjunath, H.Manjunath " 20/3 " " " " 2-14 2-43
S/o N.Honnurappa
8 " " " 20/4 " " " " 1-02 1-52
9 Mohammed Yakub Mohammed " 20/1 Sy. Sy. Nos. Sy. Nos. NH 1-08 1-62
Sait Yakub Sait No.22 20, 19 20, 22 Banga -
lore
Hosur
Road
10 Patel Thimmaiah Patel " 21/2 " " " " 5-00 7-25
s/o Muniyappa Thimmaiah
11 Achamma Kutti Achamma Kutti " 22/1 Sy. Sy. No. Sy. No. NH 7 0-31 0-56
W/o H.Jacob W/o H.Jacob No.36 21 and 23 and Banga-
and 23 20 20 lore
Hosur
Road
12
12 N.Honnurappa Vijayendra " 22/2 " " " " 1-24 2-36
S/o Motappa S/o
N.Honnurappa
13 " " " 22/3 " " " " 1-36 2-80
14 P.Poojappa S/o P.Poojappa " 23/1 Sy. Sy. Sy. Sy. 2-18 3-61
Chikka Yallappa No.36, No.24 No.34 No.22
35 and and 20
24P
15 Ramaiah S/o Ramaiah " 23/2 " " " " 1-12 1-84
Chikkamuthappa
16 " " " 23/3 " " " " 0-30 ....
17 " " " 36 Hebba- Sy. KIADB NH 7 0-10 ....
(P) godi No.22 land Banga-
Village lore
Boun- Hosur
dary Road
18 " " Villag Grama Sy. No. Konappa Sy. No. 17 " 4-02 ....
e Site -thana 17 na
Agrahara
Village
Boundary
32.22
By Order and in the name of the Governor of Karnataka
T.VENKATAIAH,
Desk Officer, Commerce & Industries Dept. (I.D.)"
(Emphasis added)
A final notification comes to be issued on 22-09-1981. It
reads as follows:
"KARNATAKA GAZETTE, OCTOBER 1, 1981
NO.CI 157 SPQ 80 DATED 22ND September, 1981.
WHEREAS by Notification No. CI 157 SPQ 80 dated 28th
February 1981 (hereinafter referred to as the said notification)
issued in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of
Section 28 of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act,
1966 (Karnataka Act, 18 of 1966) (hereinafter referred to as the
said Act) and published at page 44 of Part III-1 of the Karnataka
Gazette dated 5th March 1981, the Government of Karnataka
notified its intention to acquire the land specified therein for the
purposes specified in the said Notification.
AND WHEREAS, order under sub-section (3) of Section 28
of the said Act have been passed.
13
AND WHEREAS, the Government of Karnataka is satisfied
that the lands specified in the Schedule below which had been
specified in the said Notification should be acquired for the
purposes specified in the said Notification.
NOW THEREFORE, in exercise of the powers conferred by
sub-section (4) of Section 28 of the Karnataka Industrial Areas
Development Act, 1966 (Karnataka Act 18 of 1966), the
Government of Karnataka hereby declared that the lands
specified in the Schedule below should be acquired for the
purposes specified in the said Notification.
SCHEDULE
District-Bangalore Taluk-Anekal Hobli-Attibele Village-Veerasandra
Name of the Boundaries
Anubhavadar
Khatedar
Name of the
East West North South
Sl. NO.
Area required
Approximate
Assessment
Sy. NO.
Kind
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
A. G Rs. P.
1 Muniswamy Muniswamy Khuski 19/1 20 17 18 & 25 NH 7 3-09 4-71
bin Munilingaiah B'lore
Hosur
Road
2 Sharadamma Sharadamma Dry 19/2 1-03 1-59
w/o
" " " "
N.Ramachandra
3 R.N.Lalitha R.N.Lalitha 19/3 1-09 1-81
" " " " "
4 Mohammed Mohammed 19/4 1-22 0-81
Yakub Sait Yakub Sait
" " " " "
5 Sharadamma Sharadamma 20/1 21, 22 19, 25, 23 19 2-00 2-69
w/o
" 24
N.Ramachandra
6 20/2 1-32 2-60
" " " " " " "
7 H.Manjunath H.Manjunath 20/3 2-14 2-43
S/o
" " " " "
N.Honnurappa
8 R.N.Lalitha R.N.Lalitha 20/4 1-02 1-52
" " " " "
9 Mohammed Mohammed 20/1 22 19, 20 20, 22 NH 7 1-08 1-62
Yakub Sait Yakub Sait
" B'lore
Hosur
Road
10 Patel Patel 21/2 5-00 7-25
Thimmaiah Thimmaiah
" " " " "
s/o Muniyappa
11 Achamma Kutti Achamma 22/1 36 & 23 21 & 20 23 & 20 0-31 0-56
w/o H.Jacob Kutti w/o
" "
H.Jacob
14
12 N.Honnurappa Vijayendra s/o 22/2 1-24 2-36
s/o Metappa Honnurappa
" " " " "
13 R.N.Lalitha R.N.Lalitha 22/3 1-36 2-80
" " " " "
14 P.Poojappa s/o P.Poojappa 23/1 36 & 35 24 34 & 22 & 20 2-18 3-61
Chikkayalappa
" 24P
15 Ramaiah s/o Ramaiah 23/2 1-12 1-84
Chikkamuthappa
" " " " "
16 R.N.Lalitha R.N.Lalitha 23/3 0-30 ...
" " " " "
17 H.Honnurappa H.Honnurappa 36(P) Hebba- 22 KIADB NH 7 0-10 ...
" godi Land B'LORE
village Hosur
Boundary Road
29.20
By Order and in the name of the Governor of Karnataka,
T.VENKATAIAH,
Desk Officer, Commerce & Industries Dept. (I.D.)"
In juxtaposition of both the notifications what is discernable is that
gramatana land of 4.02 aces does not find place in the final
notification, as the preliminary notification at Sl.No.18 contains
gramatana land. The final notification ends at Sl.No.17. The Board
draws a sketch. In the said sketch, the land of the petitioner which
had been given up from acquisition figures. This alleged mischief on
the part of the Board has generated this litigation. In the
interregnum, it appears, the petitioner's father in terms of a sale
deed executed on 24-05-2003 purchases the subject property and
the petitioner succeeds to the said property. The petitioner claims
to be in possession of the property even as on date of notification
by the National Highways Authority of India.
15
8. The issue now is, whether the lands of the petitioner were
acquired or not. It was not acquired, as it was dropped from
acquisition is very clear from two notifications - preliminary and
final. It is pursuant to those notifications the rights of the Board
would spring. If the final notification has given up gramatana lands
in which the land of the petitioner comes, the specious plea of the
Board that out of inadvertence the land of the petitioner was left
out cannot be countenanced, after 40 years of dropping of the lands
of the petitioner from acquisition. This mischief has led to the
illusory right of the petitioner in the companion petition W.P.No.
55481 of 2017. The very same property which has been dropped
from acquisition is allotted to the petitioner in the companion
petition. The sketch appended to the petition is clear that this very
property is allotted to the petitioner in the companion petition.
9. If the Board had not acquired the property, there was no
question of allotment of the same in favour of any third party.
Therefore, it is a case which is plain and simple, having dropped
from acquisition in the year 1981, the Board cannot now contend
16
that dropping was out of inadvertence and that mistake would
enure to the benefit of the petitioner in W.P.No.55481 of 2017.
Therefore, the prayer that is sought in Writ Petition No.14732 of
2022 merits acceptance and not the prayer that is sought in the
companion petition W.P. No.55481 of 2017.
10. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
(i) Writ Petition No.14732 of 2022 is allowed.
(ii) Mandamus issues to the respondent/Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board to act in conformity with the final notification dated 22-09-1981 and bring about changes in the nature of holding of the land.
(iii) Writ Petition No.55481 of 2017 stands dismissed.
Sd/-
______________________ JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA bkp CT:MJ