The Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) should not venture into issuing preliminary notification for acquiring land without conducting proper study on its requirement, said the High Court of Karnataka.
The court also said that KIADB cannot delay issuing final notification for acquiring notified land as it would adversely affect the prospects of landowners as the law imposes restriction on use of land after they are notified for acquisition.
Justice M.I. Arun passed the order while allowing a petition filed by 60-year-old H.S. Abdul Riyaz Basha. The court quashed the preliminary notification issued by KIADB in 2009 to acquire around four acres of land belonging to the petitioner situated in Bagepalli taluk of Chickballapur district.
The KIADB cannot sit over acquisition process for an unreasonable period even though the KIAD Act does not prescribe limit for issuing final notification, the court said, while noticing that the final notification had not been issued in the case even after a lapse of 14 years since issuance of preliminary notification, thus severely affecting the interest of the petitioner.
Acquired less than 50%
The court pointed out that it was recently noticed in several cases that the KIADB had notified a vast tract of land in its preliminary notification and in the final notification the board had ended up acquiring less than 50% of the land originally proposed for acquisition in the preliminary notification.
“This shows that proper studies are not conducted by the KIADB before venturing into acquiring land. It [KIADB] should not indulge in notifying land that is not required,” the court observed.
Inconvenience caused
Further, the court said that after issuance of preliminary notification, if the acquisition process is not completed at a faster pace, it causes huge inconvenience to persons whose land are notified by way of 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 land... nor will buyers come forward to purchase land notified,” the court observed.
