(Prayer: This Writ Appeal is filed u/S 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act praying to i. set aside the impugned judgment dated January 08, 2026 passed in WP No.33550/2024 insofar as it remits the matter to the SLAO and consequently quash the preliminary notification dated March 15, 2024 and the declaration under Section 3(1) of KIADB Act, 1966 (Annexure B).)

Oral Judgment

T.M. Nadaf, J.

1. This Writ appeal is by the petitioner in W.P.No.33550/2024 challenging the order dated 08.01.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court.

2. The learned Single Judge under the impugned order partly allowed the Writ Petition, and remanded the matter to the Special Land Acquisition Officer ('SLAO' for short) to consider the objections under Section 28(3) of Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board Act, 1966 ('KIADB Act' for short) and pass orders thereon and quashed the Final Notification issued under Section 28(4) of the KIADB Act.

3. The parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Writ Court.

4. Heard, Sri.Dhyan Chinnappa., learned Senior counsel appearing for the Advocate on record, Sri.G.S.Aruna, learned HCGP appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri.K.Shashi Kiran Shetty., learned Senior counsel for KIADB.

5. The only argument advanced by Sri Dhyan Chinnappa is that the Writ Court while remanding the matter has interpreted two circulars on which the entire case of the petitioners rests and the same is against the order passed by the co-ordinate bench of this Court in Writ Appeal Nos.461/2016 and 39/2024. In the event the SLAO to consider the objections, the said interpretation by the Writ Court would be binding on the SLAO and prejudice the case of the petitioner.

6. In response, Sri.Shashi Kiran Shetty., learned Senior counsel submits that the Court may direct the SLAO to consider the objections already filed and the additional objections, if any to be filed, without being influenced by the interpretation of the Circulars by the learned Single Judge and also in consonance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Divison Judge of this Court in W.A.Nos.461/2016 and 39/2024.

7. In view of the submission of learned Senior counsel Sri.Shashi Kiran Shetty., nothing survives further to consider the case of the appellants. In that view of the matter, while upholding the judgment of the writ Court, we observe that the SLAO has to consider the objections already filed and the additional objections if any to be filed independently without being influenced by the interpretation of the writ Court on the circulars, in accordance with the law.

8. The parties are at liberty to file additional objections and cite the judgments in support of their contentions within 10 days from today and the SLAO is directed to consider and pass reasoned order in accordance with law after providing opportunity of personal hearing, as expeditiously as possible within an outer limit of one month thereafter. The parties are directed to appear before the SLAO on 10.04.2026.

9. With these observations, the Writ Appeal stands disposed of.