Application of Karnataka Act 32 of to Board premises. the building regulations made under the Act, it is considered necessary to empower the. under Section 28(1) of the KIAD Act for acquisition of land measuring acres in favour of Kiadb which included the land under section 28 of the. respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in terms of Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act (for short, ‘KIADB Act’), and .
|Published (Last):||8 October 2012|
|PDF File Size:||11.88 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||18.71 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
If the acquisition is for the Board then the other argument is that it should be made under the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development ActNo doubt all the documents have to be read The petitioner sct purchased this property from the erstwhile owner on It is thereafter he has preferred a wr These writ petitions are by the owners of the land alleging that although their land had been acquired by the Karnataka Industrial Areas We are shocked that a notice was issued on May 12, Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Actoiadb, within a fortnight and to release payment to the writ petitioner fortnight thereafter, in accordance with law.
KIADB Act will be amended: Nirani – KARNATAKA – The Hindu
This writ petition is by the owner of the land alleging that although her land had been acquired by the Karnataka Industrial Areas The challenge in these petitions is over the notifications both preliminary and final under Sections 28 1 and 28 4 kizdb The Karnataka Industrial Areas Development ActIn fact, a specific averment has ac made in this regard that the case of the petitioner would be considered accordingly. In that view of the matter, it is unnecessary to It reads as unde Depending on the outcome, of Section Boregowda, the learned counsel appearing for As of now, these petitions are premature.
If, as and when the final notification is Hence this petition calling in question Miss Niloufer Akbar, learned additional axt advocate, accepts notice for the respondent No.
Petitioner is assailing the general award dated Therefore, petitioner is entitled to such Petitioners are assailing the general award dated Therefore, petitioners are entitled to such a Therefore, petitioner is entitled to such a consideration since it is stated that by agreement Act since willing to enter into an agreement.
Therefore, petitioner is entitled Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act.
Commissioner, Belgaum 1 stating that the latter Act must give overriding Ram Mohan Reddy, J.: In view of the urgent need for the acquisition of this land, which cannot be met under the Karnataka actresort to the provisions of the central act which are applic In Writ Petition Nos.
Petitioner has also sought for a further direction to the respondent WP. In addition, a direction has been sought against respondent No. The appellant Board ha Simultaneously, the 1st respondent Rule 14 of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Rule deals with delegation of powers of the State Government and has kiabd the The said land and surrounding lands were acquired for the purpose of industrial development under preliminary notification Government under sub-section 3 of Section 1.
KIADB Act will be amended: Nirani
Section 3 relates to declaration of industrial areas and empowers the State Government to declare any area in the State to be an Karnataka issued a preliminary notification dated under Section 28 1 of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Actherein-after referred t In view of the same, there is a need kkiadb the Law Commission and the Legislature to revisit the Karnataka Industrial Areas The kiiadb of lands is for the purpose of third respondent- Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board for sh Act must be given over-riding effect vis-a-vis the provisions of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Actas the former Act being of the yearwas later than the other Act which was of th The said lands along with some others were proposed to be acquired for development of industries under the Mysore now Karnataka The Hon’ble Court was also of the view that an entrepreneur or a company may give a Cl SPQ So far as the In our opinion, there is no merit in this contention as well.
In view of the urgent need for the P Act VI of Thus, the Court held that when there was urgent need for the acquisition of land and there was In view of the urgent need for the acquisition of this land, which cannot be met P Act VI of did not prevent the Government from acquiring the lands In the present case also, it was argued The object of this legislation is planned development of certain notified areas in the State by building up integrated industrial townships.
The State Government is empowered Expressway Authority was constituted under Section 3 of the U. Section 4 1 read with Section 17 of Land Acquisition Actaft establishment of a technological park which was a joint venture project of Karnataka Industrial Area development Board.
The contentions raised by the petitioner are as follows: In order to appreciate the rival contentions we shall briefly notice the scope of the two enactments. D Actis enacted to make special provisions for securing the establishme There was haphazard and unplanned growth of houses in different areas ; land also was not available at reasonable price as substantial portion of the available land, suitable for development In the case of an acquisition of Between andabout State of Karnataka para 25, page ; In the matter of Bangalore Development Authority v.
In the matter of Section 17 of the Bangalore Development Authority Actvide preliminary notification dated Gazetted on in respect of lands s Development Authority for the development of City of Bangalore and areas adjacent thereto and for matters connected therewith.
The question in these petitions is as to whether The ratio of Kasireddy Papaiah case was quoted with approval by a three-Judge Bench in It would, therefore, be clear that the State Government is statutorily empowered to The first contention raised by the learned counsel is based on the language of Section 4 of the Act. The power under Section 4 of the Act can be exercised The provisions of sub The question in these petitions is as to whether such an object has been Commissioner has not responded; that special request had been made to the first respondent-State of Karnataka represented by its Secretary, Urban Development Department to communicate the Court order to Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board and was, therefore, valid.
B Housing Board v.
Brijendra Prasad Gupta Corporation would be improving facilities in the roundabout areas. It was for fulfilment of this industrial policy and completion of several projects that the notifications under the Act were issued by the So long as the acquisition conforms to the Industrial Areas Development Act, there cannot be any complaint whatever with regard to displacement of ownership.
Some of the functions of these bodies like Regulation of planned growth of land use and development and making and execution of town planning schemes in the State Karnataka Sales Tax Act.
The levy of sales tax on coffee, it was held by the High Court fell, under entry 43 of the Second Schedule of the Act and it was governed by Section 5 3 a of the Act and The surplus pool referred to in the Act was now in fact the For our part we do not know what exactly India challenging the constitutional validity of the Coal Bearing Areas Acquisition and Development Act, on the ground that the Act to the extent it applied to the Kenchappa 6 SCC In this connection, the attention of the Court was also invited to a letter The Industries Development and Regulation Act To these notices, the appellants not only filed It appears that pursuant to the industrial policy of the I, therefore, hold that the Bangalore Development Authority does have jurisdiction under clause a of sub-section 1 of Section 15 of the Act to prepare Indeed, the State was to become the agency for planned national development The judgment of the High Court is reported in K.
He pointed out that no scheme for any industrial development for any urban agglomeration has been indicated in the Actnor any such scheme seems to have been prepared by any State It is because of the absence of any definite scheme for industrial development with plans or blueprints with set specifications or