Karnataka High Court
The Secretary Agricultural Produce ... vs The Director Agricultural Produce ... on 21 February, 2024
Author: B.M.Shyam Prasad
Bench: B.M.Shyam Prasad
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1671-DB
WA No. 200175 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
WRIT APPEAL NO. 200175 OF 2022 (APMC)
BETWEEN:
THE SECRETARY,
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE,
BIDAR-585401.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. GOURISH S KHASHAMPUR, FOR
SRI. KRUPA SAGAR PATIL, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. THE DIRECTOR,
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MAREKTING COMMITTEE,
NO.16, 2ND RAJ BHAVAN ROAD,
P. B. NO.5309, BANGALORE-01.
Digitally signed by
RAMESH 2. M/S MALLAPPA AND SONS,
MATHAPATI VEGETABLE MERCHANT,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR,
KARNATAKA
MALLAPPA S/O GUNDAPPA,
AGE: 69 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O SHOP NO. 05, MAHEBOOB GUNJ,
APMC MARKET YARD, BIDAR-585401.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY, G.A. FOR R1)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO, SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 18.07.2022 IN W.P.NO.201719/2022 (APMC)
PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE AND ALLOW THE
WRIT APPEAL IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1671-DB
WA No. 200175 of 2022
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
B.M.SHYAM PRASAD J. DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The private respondents in these writ appeal has filed
by the writ petition impugning the order issued by the
appellant for cancellation of the allotment of corresponding
plots on the ground that the allotment price is not paid
within time. The writ petition has been disposed of by
similar but separate orders which are impugned in the writ
appeal. The writ Court has allowed the writ petition by
quashing the appellant's order with directions that read as
under:
"i) Out of the balance amount, a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- shall be paid by the petitioner to
respondent no.2 within a period of one month from the
date of receipt of the certified copy of this order;
ii) The petitioner is granted six months time from
today to pay the balance amount towards lease-cum-
sale of the shop in question to respondent no.2 and he
shall also pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as penalty to
respondent no.2 along with the balance amount which
is liable to be paid;
iii) It is made clear that the petitioner shall not be
entitled for any further extension of time to pay the
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1671-DB
amount, and in the event, the petitioner fails to pay the
arrears as directed by this Court herein above,
respondents are liberty to take action in accordance
with law."
It is seen from the records that similar directions
issued by the writ Court in W.P.No.201784/2022 are
impugned in W.A.No.200171/2022, and this writ appeal is
disposed of on 08.12.2022 considering the circumstances in
which the directions are issued. This Court's observations
in this order dated 08.12.2022 reads as follows:
"4. We are unable to find any fault or error in the order
passed by the learned Single Judge. The order is
passed considering the balance of equities as well as
considering the peculiar circumstances of the case. As
such in our opinion, the appeal is devoid of merits and
deserves to be dismissed and the same is accordingly
dismissed."
The learned counsel for the appellant does not contend
that the concerned respondent is differently placed. This
Court is in respectful agreement with the conclusion as
aforesaid, and therefore, no interference is called for in any
in this writ appeal. However, this Court must observe that
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1671-DB
this disposal would not effect any course of action that
would be available to the appellant in terms of the directions
issued by the writ Court, if amount is not paid.
The appeals stand disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
SDU
CT: CS
