WP N01 791012006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY 0? JUNE 2003
BEFORE
THE HGKBLE DR. JUSTICE K. 1% ' 1'
WRIT PETITION NO.17910/2805 (cm-i§ssnjg::;., %V
BETWEEN
Sn' Ajit Kumar,
S] 0 late Navarathna Raju,
Age: 48 years,
Proprietor, _T ' ;
M/s. Span Auto Components, '
Shed No.3-379, ' ' ._ "
Industrial Estate,
Peenyai Stage, __
Ba1:1galo1'e-56C3 058. .j_
(By Sri Anandafazgaa '
M] s. Sundmaswamy,' Ramdasfia Anand,
Advs., f(;¥1_§f"pCiiti£)II€I') " A _
Industzics
Dcvalopmézzt Ciorpziration,
_ _T A_Company isncésporated under the
Cnmyanics Ad; 1955,
A '1._I-iavinbgéits Reggisterred Ofice at
-" « _ V 'aajaginagar Industrial Estate,
__ -- ' .Ba__z"1ga1cx:e~560 01 1
; Rcprescntcci by its Managng Director.
L '= "€;'hi¢f Manager (I E-Z 1)
State Small Industries
Development Cnlpomtion (IE),
Petitioner
WPNO.l79l0/2006
Rajajinagar lndtlstrrial Estate,
Bangalore-560 G44.
3. Deputy Chief Manager 6133-2 1),
Karnataka State Small Industries
Development Corporation (IE),
Peenya 1*' Stage, " '-_ _ "
Bangalore-«S60 O38. _ . A Resp§am:1er1'Ls
(By Sr: Puttige R Ramesh, Adm, fo1°e.e,é#] and '2.')_V_ ' V. V.
(R-3 is served, but "un~nepresented_)____
an-:".
This Writ Petition is fi3cd_unCi€:rvV.Ax*ti(%Ie "226 of the Constitution
of India, praying 1;o«_ti;e n(;tifica1ionVdat:xi' 16.11.2006 (Annexure-M)
issued by the resgiongfiientsv in éapw fargas it ieiétes to S1. No.2 which is
the schedule "hereunder; etc.
Thisve'Petif£nAi:§. co1::ij1g"o:j"for hearing this day, the Court made
thefollo-Wii'_V1g: _ _ " * N -- .
'Cbnnea
' V' . A filéfifibsaer is this Court for the following reliefs:
x the letter of cancellation dated 3.2.2006 issued
z respondent at Anneuxre-N,
” {ii}. quash the notification dated 10.1 1.2006 (Anncxme-M)
issued by the respondents in so far as it relates to SI.
No.2 which is the schedule property, and
L
W? N0.I’f9iGf2fiG6
the respondents to execute sale deed. when the matter stpod thus,
the: respondents unilaterally publishcd notification datt.u_’:i’V 2006
for allowcnt of industrial plots (stray plots) and
from the entrepreneurs for allotment __of.t1_1c ij uf.1*;€: ‘
ixldusttrial shed, Pccnya, which inclilécd ‘A
Land at ‘.31; No.2 of the 11otii”i(rafion’i_iat§:d 1i).v..1
3. It is contmaded by +3.: without notice t0 the
petitioner, the respondents. .. hav¢ ” the marginal land
allotment in favo1::__i’4§$§TVfi}c.vi2¢fifié¥1cf’b§”§t5s”‘1$tter dated 3.2.2006 at
Anncxtlrc-R,’ TE1£:r:§ft’§rr’::;- is before this Court praying for
that rclicfs, as fn¢nfioti£rd’4abov;ég
Nos.1 and 2 have filed statement of
objectioggj V
The—- .. petitioner has filed rejoinder to the statement of
(5i3jéc:.1io:I.si
6. The bone of contention of the rcspondcnts is that the
pefitioncr has not put up any construction on the marginal land
6
WPNO.1′?9l{1f2fl£)6
ailotted in favour of the petitioner as per the lease pun: sale
ageement and therefore the respondents, after issuing. the
petitioner, have cancelled allotment of marginal 1an¢’fa’~;:;u;r}m}”:t;c
petitioner and proceeded to sell stray plots
land allotted in favour of the pefitioner age 12e’ti:fi-zxaiiifie at *:
A1mexme-M and there is no or
oxders and the action of the allotment
of the margina} land in rav:;},gij«o£ em is ineeeoxtianee with
the terms of the agxeemeny that since the
petitioner has violafe§Ij;:jet1″ee of the lease cum sale
agxeement,:’:__t;b.e right to file a Writ Petition, and
prayed for digmiseax’ (sf %£f’£it.eV’i5eitition.
mmezlts.
A Counsel for the petitionezr submits that the
e afiotment of plot on the rear side of industriai shed
the imp11g1ed letter dated 3.2.2f)06 is bad in law on the
that no notice was fiven. It is also submitted that since tile
‘~pei:itio11er has already constructed a shed and running the industry
” in the plot healing No.3-379 and the marginal iand was used for the
av
WP N0.l79l0/2906
purpose of petitioner’s industrial activities, the of the
petitioner should have put up construction on the egg I
not sustainable.
9. On the other hand, Sri P»R-.i§ames3t;1r.a11:eti ..f()i”‘::IjZ}1c
respondent Nos.1 and 2, submits 11otic.te”s~eVr1_tV’:to the petitioner
reganzling cancellation of in favour of
the petitioner was returned “addressee left’. A
copy of the notjee;”xir’a’:§3.t:t:.;oaefs1::e’c1 of the address and
thus, the on the petitioner.
Subsequentljrwthe land in favour of the
petitioner eras iiznoufied letter dated 3.2.2006 at
An11exure~_N as ‘”there_is A’-._vi1et:ion of lease cum sale ageement
,petit:”ioner–and there is no illegality or infilmity in the
10.4′. the petitioner has not put up any shed on the
aliotted by the respondents in favour of the petitioner.
:_’I’}3fe has not put up any construction on the marginal land
V as: that is in the rear side of his industrial shed bearing No.3-3’29.
marginal land is allotted in favour of the adjoinixlg ehed owner,
who has already constzmeted a building and running the industry,
8
‘WPNO.1″!’91Ql2G06
the stipulation that the allottee of the marginal land sltalt put up
construction on the marginal land is without merit -‘er–V..A’good
ground. The petitioner wanted a marginal land for for
industly. Under such circumstances,
allotment of the margnai land in fasfourflof ‘
gonad of nonvoonstruction of sheet” not
that the respondents have not to that the show
cause notice is served oat _ is no satisfactoxy
material on meoifi to»s}:1ow:.that 1;: shes? was served on
the petitionex-~e.33é1:2:+t’e’6fVVt;tte allotment of the marginal
land. The in favour of the petitioner and
lease cum salefideed. executed on 2. I2. 1992. Accoxtiing to
the “cieed____a*£; A1mexu:xe–H, the petitioner was put in
Apossessanpn land on 14.12.1973 and the period of ten
on 13.12.1983. Therefore, the petitioner was
efitifledtthto absolute sale deed executed in his favour in respect
‘file site. The respondents were not justificd in cancelling
of marginal site in favour of the petitioner on the
T that he has not put up any constsruetzion therein.
L
WP N01 7’9IGf20G6
1 1. For the abovc–said reasons, the Petition xi§V’a;t1d the
impugned letter of cancellation at AIIIICXHR3-N for
allotment 91′ industxial plots at A::1nc:xmve~M, N’oA.2V,’
quashed.
The ncspondcnt No.3 is to c3kecI:iir:V’:al3aéplute sale deed
within 3 months, in pf months from
the date of receipt of copy’ :b1fl§f,vAA->.§:I»§_bjcct to the petitioner
complying with ghc’ regard.
No sa/-e
Judga