Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act | High Court Sets Aside 2009 Notification For Land Acquisition Upon Noting No Steps Were Taken For 14 Yrs

The Karnataka High Court has observed that the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (KIADB) which is entrusted to establish and develop industries in suitable areas in the State, must first determine the area that is required for the establishment of industries after conducting a study and only thereafter venture to acquire the lands.

A Single judge bench of Justice M I Arun made the observations while allowing a plea filed by H S Abdul Riyaz Basha whose land was notified for acquisition under a preliminary notification, but no final notification was passed for the last 14 years.

The court said “The Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 is enacted to make provision for the orderly establishment and development of industries in suitable areas in the State. To achieve this object, the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board is established and it is required to specify areas for industrial development and make available lands therein for establishment of industries.”

It observed that on many occasions, the Board in its preliminary notification sought to acquire vast tracts of land, but in the final notification, ended up acquiring less than 50% of the original lands proposed.

The court opined that such actions showed that a proper study was not conducted by the Board before venturing into acquiring the lands.

It was observed that after the issuance of preliminary notification, if the acquisition process was not completed at a faster pace, it would cause huge inconvenience to the persons whose lands were notified for acquisition in the preliminary notification.

"It will prevent them from exploiting the potential of the land to its fullest extent, as passing of preliminary notification is a deterrent for them to develop the lands as desired by them nor will purchasers come forward to purchase the said land,” the Court observed.

Court noted that in the present case, preliminary notification was issued on 11.12.2009 for acquiring certain lands that belonged to the petitioner, but the final notification had not yet been issued and no award had been passed in respect of the said lands.

It held “In the instant case, as more than 14 years have lapsed after issuance of the preliminary notification and nothing has been done in pursuance of the same to complete the acquisition formalities, it has to be held that the acquisition process has lapsed and the preliminary notification is liable to be struck down.”

It added that although the Act did not specify the time within which a final notification had to be issued, the respondents were expected to issue a final notification within a reasonable time and the delay of 14 years cannot be considered reasonable.

However, it clarified that setting aside the preliminary notification will not preclude the respondent/KIADB from initiating a fresh acquisition process in accordance with law.

Appearance: Advocate Sreekala P. A for Lakshmish G for Petitioner.

AGA Naveen Chandrashekar for R1.

Advocate Ashok N Nayak for R2, R3.

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 54

Case Title: H S Abdul Riyaz Basha AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: Writ Petition 26117 of 2022

Click Here To Read/Download Order