- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4032 WP No. 32402 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 32402 OF 2025 (LA-UDA) BETWEEN: SRI. MALLEGOWDA S/O LATE MALLEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, R/AT NO.105, YANDAHALLI VILLAGE, LALITHADRIPURA POST, VARUNA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK AND DISTRICT-570010. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. B.V. VIDYULATHA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JHANSI LAKSHMI BAI ROAD, MYSORE-570005, BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, Digitally signed by VIDYA G R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4032 WP No. 32402 of 2025 JHANSI LAKSHMI BAI ROAD, MYSORE-570005. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. A.S. HARISHA, AGA FOR R1; SRI. T.P. VIVEKANANDA, ADV. FOR R2 AND R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER SIMILAR WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION, QUASHING THE PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION DATED 28.12.2006, BEARING NO.LAQ (2) CR 161/2005-06 ISSUED THE BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AUTHORITY AT ANNEXURE-B TO THE WRIT PETITION IN SO FAR AS SCHEDULE PROPERTY BELONGING TO THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondent No.1. Learned counsel Sri. T.P. Vivekananda accepts notice of respondents No.2 and 3. 2. The petitioner has sought for setting aside of the preliminary notification dated 28.12.2006 bearing No.LAQ(2)CR 161/2005-06 issued by respondent No.2 at Annexure-B to the writ petition, insofar as schedule - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4032 WP No. 32402 of 2025 property belonging to the petitioner. The petitioner has also sought for declaration that the acquisition proceedings initiated have lapsed. 3. It is submitted that insofar as acquisition relating to Lal Bahadur Shastri Nagar 2nd Stage extension, this Court in the series of matters has set aside the notification and declared the proceedings to have lapsed, noticing that the preliminary notification was notified on 28.12.2006, however no further steps have been taken to effectuate the land acquisition proceedings. 4. Perused the order in W.P.No.11837/2023, which reads as follows: "The petitioner has challenged the validity of the Preliminary Notification dated 28.12.2006 issued by respondent No.2 under Section 17(1) of the Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 'KUDA Act' for the sake of brevity) proposing to acquire the petitioner's land bearing Sy.No.153/7 [old No.153/2] measuring an extent of 10 guntas situated in Yandahalli Village, Varuna Hobali, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4032 WP No. 32402 of 2025 Mysuru Taluk and District for formation of a Layout known as "Lalbahadur Shastri Nagar II Stage". 2. The relief sought in this petition is on terms of parity in light of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.52285/2019 and W.P.No.10179/2020. The uncontroverted fact being that despite Preliminary Notification having been passed on 28.12.2006 for the purpose of formation of "Lalbahadur Shastri Nagar II Stage", no steps have been taken for the purpose of completing the acquisition proceedings. 3. This Court, in the case of Chowda Shetty vs. State of Karnataka and others [W.P.No.47125/2016 at Paragraph No.4 in Page 54] decided on 24.10.2016 and in the case of Sri. Shivanna vs. State of Karnataka and others [W.P.No.1409/2018] disposed of on 06.02.2018, in similar factual matrix, noticing that despite the Preliminary Notification having been issued in the year 2006, no subsequent steps have been taken, has allowed the writ petitions and quashed the Preliminary Notification observing that there was lapse of acquisition. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also produced copies of the orders passed in - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4032 WP No. 32402 of 2025 W.P.No.10179/2020 as well as in W.P.No.52285/2019. Accordingly, the petitioner is entitled for the relief of declaration that the acquisition has lapsed. 4. The petition is allowed and consequently the Preliminary Notification bearing No.LAQ(2)CR/161/2005-2006 dated 28.12.2006 is hereby quashed insofar as petitioner's land is concerned." 5. In light of parity of the petitioner with respect to the petitioner in W.P.No.11837/2023, petition deserves to be allowed. It is not controverted by the respondent that after the preliminary notification, no further action has been taken. If that were to be so, due to failure of taking action to effectuate the land acquisition proceedings within a reasonable time, the proceedings for acquisition can be construed to having been abandoned. 6. In light of the observations extracted above in W.P.No.11837/2023, petition is allowed and the preliminary notification dated 28.12.2006 is quashed, insofar as the petitioner's land is concerned, while making - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4032 WP No. 32402 of 2025 it clear that the revenue authorities may take note of the same and rectify the revenue entries appropriately, in light of the order passed by this Court. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE MCR