SRI. K. M. HOMBEGOWDA vs STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60307
WP No. 27209 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010603662026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 29 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO. 27209 OF 2026 (LA-KIADB)
BETWEEN:
SRI. K.M. HOMBEGOWDA
S/O LATE MULEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.11,
TH TH
10 CROSS, 4 MAIN,
HALANAHALLI BADAVANE,
MYSORE CITY,
KARNATAKA-570028.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. A.P. RANGANATHA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES,
VIKASA SOUDHA,
DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
EXECUTIVE MEMBER,
NO.14/3, MAHARSHI ARAVIND BHAVAN,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
3. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS
DEVELOPMENT BOARD (BMICP),
ST
NO.14/3, 1 FLOOR,
Digitally
signed by
HEMALATHA J
Location:
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60307
WP No. 27209 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010603662026
MAHARSHI ARAVIND BHAVAN,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
4. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS
DEVELOPMENT BOARD (BMICP),
ST
NO.14/3, 1 FLOOR,
MAHARSHI ARAVIND BHAVAN,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
5. NANDI INFRASTRUCTURE CORRIDOR
ENTERPRISE LIMITED
COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
COMPANIES ACT, 1956
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
NO.1, MIDFORD HOUSE,
MIDFORD GARDENS,
OFF M.G. ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. H.L.PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1;
SRI. P.V.CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 TO
4;
SRI. NITIN PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.5)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION BEARING NO. CI 196 SPQ 98 DATED
03.07.1999, INSOFAR AS IT RELATES TO LAND FORMERLY BEARING
OLD SURVEY NO.83/1-P2, 84/1PAI-P1, 84/1PAI-P2, 84/2B PAIKI-P1,
84/2B PAIKI-P2, 93/PAI-P2-P2 AND 93/PAI-P28 AND PRESENTLY
BEARING RE-SURVEY SY.NO.83, SY.NO.84/5, SY.NO.84/6,
SY.NO.84/7 AND SY.NO.84/8 AND SY.NO.422 MEASURING 1 ACRE
31 GUNTAS, 33 GUNTAS, 1 ACRE 13 GUNTAS, 11 GUNTAS, 11
GUNTAS, 28 GUNTAS AND 26 GUNTAS RESPECTIVELY, SITUATED AT
HEBBADI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT (ANNEXURE -A) AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN
'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60307
WP No. 27209 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010603662026
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner has called in question the preliminary
notification bearing No.CI:196:SPQ:98 dated 03.07.1999
issued by the respondent No.1 under Section 28(1) of the
Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (henceforth
referred to as 'the KIAD Act') and to declare that the acquisition
proceedings initiated by the respondents in respect of the lands
formerly bearing old Sy.Nos.83/1-P2, 84/1Pai-P1, 84/1Pai-P2,
84/2B Paiki-P1, 84/2B Paiki-P2, 93/Pai-P2-P2 and 93/Pai-P28
and presently bearing re-survey No.83, Sy.No.84/5,
Sy.No.84/6, Sy.No.84/7, Sy.No.84/8 and Sy.No.422 measuring
1 acre 31 guntas, 33 guntas, 1 acre 13 guntas, 11 guntas, 11
guntas, 28 guntas and 26 guntas respectively, situated at
Hebbadi Village, Kasaba Hobli, Srirangapatna Taluk, Mandya
District (land in question) have lapsed.
2. The petitioner claims that he is the absolute owner
and is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land in
question. He claims that the respondent No.1 had issued a
notification under Section 28(1) of the KIAD Act on 03.07.1999,
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60307
WP No. 27209 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010603662026
proposing to acquire several lands including the land in
question for Bengaluru-Mysuru Infrastructure Corridor Project.
The petitioner contends that he purchased the land in question
from the notified khatedars. He contends that even after 27
years, the respondents did not issue any final notification under
Section 28(4) of the KIAD Act. He contends that the
respondents have thus abandoned the acquisition. He contends
that similarly placed landlosers had approached this Court in
various Writ Petitions and that this Court in
W.P.Nos.29365/2024, 29385/2024 and 28886/2024 quashed
the preliminary notification. He therefore challenged the
preliminary notification and sought for a declaration that the
acquisition has lapsed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the
aforesaid contentions and submitted that after issuance of a
preliminary notification, the respondent No.1 has not taken any
steps to issue a final notification and therefore, the petitioner
cannot be kept waiting endlessly. He therefore submits that the
acquisition has lapsed and prays for a declaration to that effect.
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60307
WP No. 27209 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010603662026
4. The learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and
the learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4 do not dispute
the fact that after issuance of a preliminary notification no
steps are taken to issue a final notification. They also do not
dispute that similar questions of fact and law arose for
consideration in W.P.Nos.29365/2024, 29385/2024 and
28886/2024 and that this Court had quashed the preliminary
notification and allowed the landlosers to utilize their land.
5. The learned counsel for respondent No.5 on the
other hand contended that the delay in issuing the final
notification is only attributable to the respondent Nos.1 and 2
and therefore liberty be reserved to respondent No.5 to take
necessary action against the respondent Nos.1 and 2.
6. I have considered the submissions of the learned
counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the
respondent No.1, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4
and learned counsel for respondent No.5.
7. It is not in dispute that after a preliminary
notification dated 03.07.1999 issued by the respondent No.1
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60307
WP No. 27209 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010603662026
under Section 28(1) of the KIAD Act, no steps are taken to
issue a final notification. As rightly contended by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner cannot be kept waiting
endlessly and he cannot be deprived of the use of his land for
whatever purpose that he intends to. Therefore, the proposal to
acquire the land of the petitioner has remained a proposal and
the acquisition has not been concluded. Consequently, the
petitioner is entitled to utilize his land for whatever purpose
that he desires.
8. In view of the above, the following order is passed:
ORDER
allowed
i. The petition is ;
ii. The impugned preliminary notification bearing
No.CI:196:SPQ:98 dated 03.07.1999 issued by
the respondent No.1, in respect of the lands
formerly bearing old Sy.Nos.83/1-P2, 84/1Pai-P1,
84/1Pai-P2, 84/2B Paiki-P1, 84/2B Paiki-P2,
93/Pai-P2-P2 and 93/Pai-P28 and presently
bearing re-survey No.83, Sy.No.84/5, Sy.No.84/6,
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60307
WP No. 27209 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010603662026
Sy.No.84/7, Sy.No.84/8 and Sy.No.422 measuring
1 acre 31 guntas, 33 guntas, 1 acre 13 guntas, 11
guntas, 11 guntas, 28 guntas and 26 guntas
respectively, situated at Hebbadi Village, Kasaba
Hobli, Srirangapatna Taluk, Mandya District, is
quashed;
iii. It is also declared that the proposal to acquire the
aforesaid land has lapsed. Consequently, any
entry of the name of the respondent No.1 or the
respondent No.2 in the revenue records of the
aforesaid land shall stand deleted and the name of
the petitioner shall stand restored forthwith;
iv. The respondent No.5 is at liberty to proceed
against the respondent No.1 and 2 for not taking
out necessary steps to conclude the acquisition.
Sd/-
(R. NATARAJ)
JUDGE
PMR
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 87