- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35420 WP No. 18951 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 18951 OF 2026 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN: 1. M/S HOTEL RAMA PRIVATE LIMITED PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.29/2, H M STRAFFORD VASANTHANAGAR BANGALORE-560052 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR MR. H.J. BALRAM 2. M/S GEMINI DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.29/2, H M STRAFFORD VASANTHANAGAR BANGALORE-560052 REPRESENTED BY DIRECTOR MR. H.J. BALRAM 3. M/S RAIN MAKERS PROPERTY PRIVATE LIMITED PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.29/2, H M STRAFFORD VASANTHANAGAR BANGALORE-560052 REPRESENTED BY DIRECTOR MR. H.J. BALRAM Digitally signed by HEMALATHA J Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35420 WP No. 18951 of 2026 4. M/S HIREHAL ENTERPRISES LIMITED A PUBLIC COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.29/2, H M STRAFFORD VASANTHANAGAR BANGALORE-560052 REPRESENTED BY DIRECTOR MR. H.J. BALRAM 5. M/S AMOHA PROPERTY DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY, INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 1956 NO.29/2, H M STRAFFORD VASANTHANAGAR BANGALORE-560052 REPRESENTED BY DIRECTOR MR. H.J. BALRAM 6. M/S SUMAN SUGIYAMA ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED, PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 1956 NO.29/2, H M STRAFFORD VASANTHANAGAR BANGALORE-560052 REPRESENTED BY DIRECTOR MR. H.J. BALRAM …PETITIONERS (BY SMT. GEETHA DEVI M.P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, VIDHAN SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001 REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY 2. DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE STATE OF KARNATAKA 1ST FLOOR, VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE- 560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35420 WP No. 18951 of 2026 PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 3. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE STATE OF KARNATAKA AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, VIDHANSOUDHA BENGALURU-560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 4. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BOARD (KIADB) KHANIJA BHAVAN BANGALORE- 560001 REP BY ITS EXECUTIVE MEMBER 5. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER (KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD) NRUPATUNGA ROAD BANGALORE-560001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. POOJA M. KOORSE, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 3; SRI. H.L.PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.4 AND 5) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS FROM RESPONDENT NO.1 REGARDING THE NOTIFICATION BEARING NO.CI 85 SPQ 2025 DATED 25.06.2025 ISSUED BY THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AT ANNEXURE-A AND QUASH NOTIFICATION BEARING NO. CI 85 SPQ 2025 DATED 25-06-2025 ISSUED BY THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AT ANNEXURE-A PETITIONER CONCERN ONLY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35420 WP No. 18951 of 2026 ORAL ORDER The petitioners have called in question a preliminary notification bearing No.¹L 85 J¸ï¦PÀÆå 2025 dated 25.06.2025 issued by the respondent No.1 in so far as it relates to land bearing Sy.Nos.17/1, 17/2, 17/3, 17/5, 17/6, 17/7, 182/3, 182/6, 182/14 and 182/19 of Bikkanahalli Village, Sarjapura Hobli, Anekal Taluk. 2. The petitioners contend that the aforesaid survey numbers were converted from agricultural to non-agricultural residential purposes in terms of various official memorandum issued by the Deputy Commissioner, which were all prior to the year 2025. They contend that the respondent No.1 without considering the aforesaid fact and also the purchase of the properties by the petitioners, issued a preliminary notification under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (henceforth referred to as ‘the KIAD Act’) in the name of the erstwhile owners. The petitioners are therefore before this Court challenging the notification in so far as the land in the aforesaid survey numbers are concerned. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35420 WP No. 18951 of 2026 3. The learned counsel for the respondent Nos.4 and 5 after securing instructions from the respondent Nos.4 and 5 submits that till date, a final notification under Section 28(4) of the KIAD Act in respect of aforesaid survey numbers is not issued. He submits that if the petitioners have lawful title to their aforesaid properties, they may appear before the respondent No.5 and furnish all their documents and that the respondent No.5 while considering their objections shall pass appropriate orders and thereafter, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 will take necessary steps to notify the names of the petitioners. 4. It appears from the documents enclosed along with the writ petition that the petitioners had purchased converted land in the aforesaid survey numbers in terms of various sale deeds, which are all prior to the impugned preliminary notification dated 25.06.2025. Therefore, before notifying the land in the aforesaid survey numbers, it was incumbent upon the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 to verify who are the real owners of the property and also whether the land notified was converted for any other purpose. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35420 WP No. 18951 of 2026 5. In that view of the matter, instead of quashing the notification on the ground that the names of the petitioners do not appear, it is appropriate to direct the petitioners to file their objections if not already filed to the notification under Section 28(1) of the KIAD Act and also appear before the respondent No.5 and furnish all documents in support of their claim. The respondent No.5 shall consider the objections of the petitioners objectively taking into account the status of the land as on the date of the preliminary notification and pass appropriate orders. The respondent Nos.1 to 3 may thereafter consider proceeding with the acquisition in accordance with law. The respondent No.5 shall consider the objections if already filed and the fresh objections that may be filed by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders within three months from the date of filing the fresh application by the petitioners. Therefore, this petition is disposed of on the above terms. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE BKN/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47