- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22188 WP No. 11287 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 11287 OF 2026 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MR. MUKTAR AHAMAD BAIG AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS S/O LATE KHADER BAIG NO.501, 10TH MAIN 4TH MAIN ROAD, 4TH PHASE PEENYA INDUSTRIAL AREA BANGALORE-560 058. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. A.G.BALLOLLI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF MINOR IRRIGATION AND GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT BY ITS SECRETARY NO.208, 2ND FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001. 2. BENGALURU WEST CITY CORPORATION (ZONE 1) BY ITS JOINT COMMISSIONER 3RD BLOCK, 2ND MAIN ROAD 2ND AND 4TH CROSS ROAD NEAR BWSSB WATER TANK Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22188 WP No. 11287 of 2026 H.T.M LAYOUT, NAGASANDRA (POST) BENGALURU-560 073. 3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PEENYA INDUSTRIAL AREA DIVISION BENGALURU WEST CITY CORPORATION ZONE-1, 3RD BLOCK, 2ND MAIN ROAD 2ND AND 4TH CROSS ROAD NEAR BWSSB WATER TANK H.T.M LAYOUT, NAGASANDRA (POST) BENGALURU-560 073. 4. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER (CEO) & EXECUTIVE MEMBER 14/3, 2ND FLOOR, RASHTROTHANA PARISHAT BUILDING NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE-560 002. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SPOORTHI V., HCGP FOR R1; SRI. B.S.KARTHIKEYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3 SRI. G.M.ANAND, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE NOTICE DATED 02.03.2026 VIDE P.R. 50/2025-26 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22188 WP No. 11287 of 2026 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER 1. The case of the petitioner is that he has been allotted the writ petition schedule property by respondent no.4-Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (KIADB). It is his submission that he is in possession of the same and has put up an industry on the said plot. It is further submitted that he has not encroached upon even an one inch of land over and above the land allotted to him by KIADB. However, to his shock and dismay he received notice dated 02.03.2026 issued by respondent no.3 alleging that there is encroachment in respect of a lake area (Gomala land). The notice further states that if he does not vacate the said encroached, punitive action would be initiated against him. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3-Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) upon instructions, submits that, what has been issued to the petitioner is only a show cause notice and not an order to vacate the property. He further submits if petitioner were to submit the necessary records, the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22188 WP No. 11287 of 2026 same would be considered in accordance with law and appropriate orders would be passed. 3. Perusal of the impugned notice reveals that, it does not make a mention as to the allotment of an industrial plot by respondent no.4-KIADB to the petitioner. It also does not state what is the extent of land over and above the site allotted to the petitioner has been encroached by him. It is a bald notice without any particulars merely stating that the petitioner has encroached upon the margin area of the lake and unless he replies with all the necessary particulars by 06.03.2026 at 03.00 p.m. further action would be initiated against him. 4. Once land is allotted to the petitioner by a State Authority like Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (respondent no.4) for a valuable consideration, on the ground that the same lie within the margin area of the lake bed, respondent nos.2 and 3 cannot have the petitioner vacated from the premises without acquiring the land concerned in the manner known to law and paying compensation to the petitioner. If it is the case of respondent no.3-GBA that petitioner has encroached beyond the area allotted to him by respondent no.4-KIADB and that - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22188 WP No. 11287 of 2026 encroachment is part of lake bed or gomala land, to that extent respondents can initiate action against the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in the course of the arguments, submits that he is willing to submit the necessary documents regarding the allotment made by respondent no.4 in his favour. He is also agreeable for the survey of the property. It is his categorical submission that he has not encroached upon any land beyond what has been allotted to him by respondent no.4-KIADB. 6. Learned counsel for respondent no.3 submits that they will consider the documents to be submitted by the petitioner and only if it is found that he has encroached upon any area beyond what has been allotted to him by KIADB, then only action will be initiated against petitioner and not otherwise. 7. Hence, the following: ORDER (i) Petitioner shall appear before respondent no.3 on 05.05.2026 at 03.00 p.m. along with all the necessary particulars; - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22188 WP No. 11287 of 2026 (ii) The records and the physical occupation of the property by petitioner will be examined by respondent no.3 in terms of the observations made herein above and thereafter appropriate orders will be passed; (iii) Till such time, no precipitative action shall be taken against the petitioner; (iv) The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4