- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17070 WP No. 2992 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 2992 OF 2025 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN: SRI. MOHAMMED SALEEM S/O MOHAMMED YUSUF AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS R/AT. NO. 1171, SBM CROSS, CHENNAPATNA, RAMANGARA DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.G. HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE (INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT) M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO.14/3, RASHTROTHANA PARISHATH 2ND FLOOR, NRUPTHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY SPL. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER. 3. THE SPL.LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-II KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD (BMICP) 1ST FLOOR, MARSHI ARAVIND BHAVAN, Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17070 WP No. 2992 of 2025 NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. 4. M/S NANDI INFRASTRUCTURE CORRIDOR ENTERPRISES LTD, NO.1 FORD GARDENS, OPP M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001 REP.BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR. (REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT,1959) 5. NANDI ECONOMIC CORRIDOR ENTERPRISES LTD., NO.1, MIDFORD HOUSE, MIDFORD GARDENS, OFF. MG. ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001, REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. (REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT,1959) …RESPONDENTS (BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR., SR. COUNSEL SRI. S.A. AHMED & SRI. MALHARA RAO., AAG DR. RAVINDRA V REDDY & SRI. SIDHARTH BABURAO., SPL. GOVERNMENT ADVOCATES FOR R1 SRI. P.V. CHANDRASHEKAR., ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3 SRI.S.B. MATHAPATI, ADVOCATE FOR R4, SRI. R.V.S. NAIK, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. NITIN PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION DTD. 21.07.1999 BEARING NO. CI.196.SPQ.98 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITY WHICH IS PRODUCED AND MARKED AS ANNX-G.TO DECLARE THAT THE ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE RESPONDENTS AUTHORITIES IN RESPECT OF AN EXTENT OF 20 ACRES OF LAND OUT OF OLD SY.NO. 90 OF CHOLAMARANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT IS LAPSED /ABANDONED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17070 WP No. 2992 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER The petitioner is seeking to quash the impugned notification dated 21.07.1999, issued under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned notification has been subject matter of various litigations and this Court has allowed all the writ petitions and has quashed the impugned notification, insofar as the respective writ petitioners are concerned. Learned Counsel prays for similar orders, having regard to the decision in the case of Sri.C.Valliappa Vs. The State of Karnataka and others, in W.P.No.8400/2021, dated 07.06.2021. 3. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent- Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) and learned Counsel appearing for the respondent-Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprises (NICE), do not dispute the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:17070 WP No. 2992 of 2025 petitioner. However, the learned Counsel for the respondent-NICE would draw the attention of this Court to another decision in the case of Sri.Natawarlal Jasu Vs. The State of Karnataka and others, in W.P.No.4399/2023, dated 28.07.2023 and prays that similar directions that were issued to the respondent-State Government and liberty granted to the respondent-NICE, may be given. 4. In view of the decisions of the co-ordinate Benches of this Court striking down the impugned notification, the petitioner is also entitled for similar relief. 5. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned preliminary notification dated 21.07.1999 issued under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966, is hereby quashed and set aside, insofar as the petitioner’s land is concerned. 6. This order shall not come in the way of acquiring the subject property by issuing notification afresh, in accordance with law. Added, liberty is also reserved to the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:17070 WP No. 2992 of 2025 respondent-NICE to proceed against the other respondents, in accordance with law if there is any grievance against them. All contentions in that regard are kept open. No order as to costs. 7. Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE DL List No.: 3 Sl No.: 12