- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26864 WP No. 5397 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 5397 OF 2023 (GM-KIADB) BETWEEN: M/S. TERA TREATS, NO 47/24, 25 AND 26, RAGHAVENDRA INDUSTRIAL ESTAE, THIGALARAPALYA ROAD,BANGALORE 560 058, REP BY ITS ONE OF THE PARTNERS, SRI KAVISWARA, S/O S P SIDDAMALAPPA. …PETITIONER (BY MISS M V ASHWINI, ADV. FOR SRI B S REDDY.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE JOINT DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, HEAD OFFICE, BENGALURU. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPT. OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, FIRST FLOOR, VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE 560001. 3. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, RACE COURSE ROAD, KANIGA BHAVAN, BANGALORE - 560001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MANJUNATH RAYAPPA, AGA FOR R2, SRI M V VEDAMURTHY, ADV. FOR R1 AND R3) Digitally signed by BELUR RANGADHAMA NANDINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26864 WP No. 5397 of 2023 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 29.11.2022 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN NO.KIADB/HO/ALLOT/17745/2022- 23 WHICH IS AT ANNX-N.ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER IN THE LNATURE OF MANDAMUS TO THE R-3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DTD 15.06.2022 WHICH IS ANNX-M SYMPATHETICALLY ON HUMANITARIAN GROUNDS IN THE LIGHT OF THE UNEXPECTED COVID-19 PANDEMIC SITUATION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELMINARY HEARING HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER Petitioner, who was an allottee of the industrial plot bearing No.487 of Somapura Second Stage Industrial Area, Bangalore Rural District measuring 4047.00 square meters is before this Court being aggrieved by the order dated 29.11.2022 passed by the CEO and executive member of respondent No.3, by which in purported exercise of power under Section 34-B(3) and (4) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board Act, 1966 (for short, 'Act, 1966'), respondent No.3 has sought to resume the aforesaid plot and has directed the petitioner to surrender the said plot on or before 28.12.2022. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26864 WP No. 5397 of 2023 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not defaulted in compliance with the conditions of allotment. In fact, the petitioner has paid the entire value of the plot and the deed of conveyance has also been executed and without even considering the reasons/cause shown by the petitioner and without even conducting any enquiry, respondent No.3 has proceeded to pass this order. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent on a query by this Court as to whether any enquiry was conducted, submits that though no enquiry was specifically conducted, the order impugned was passed based on the material information available on record and on the basis of the submissions made by the petitioner vide letters dated 15.06.2022 and 20.07.2022. However, she fairly submits that if, granted some time, the case of the petitioner will be reconsidered after providing sufficient opportunity and appropriate orders in this regard would be passed. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26864 WP No. 5397 of 2023 4. Heard. Perused the records. 5. Paragraph 8 of the impugned order indicate that the respondent No.3 has proceeded to pass the order forming his purported “prima facie” opinion based on the records. Sub-Section (3) of Section 34-B of the Act, 1966 reads as under: "34-B. Resumption of the possession of premises including the residential tenements on breach of terms and conditions of lease or holding without authority.- (1) ...... (2) ...... (3) After considering the cause, if any, shown by the allottee and after him giving him an opportunity of being heard, the Board may pass such orders, as it deems fit". Clearly there is no compliance to the aforesaid statutory requirement. The order therefore cannot be sustained. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26864 WP No. 5397 of 2023 6. Writ Petition is allowed. Impugned order is quashed. Matter is remitted to respondent No.3, who shall afford sufficient opportunity to petitioner of personal hearing and if required, inspect the spot and thereafter, pass detailed reasoned order. Such exercise shall be undertaken within an outer limit of 6 months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. The petitioner shall in order to avoid any further delay, appear before respondent No.3 on 29.06.2026. Petitioner is also at liberty to furnish such additional information as may be required and requisitioned in the matter. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE brn List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9