- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:7237 WP No. 3805 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 3805 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: M/S KRISHNA ENTERPRISES VASAVI TEMPLE RAD, ANEKAL TALUK -562 125 BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT BY ITS PROPRIETR SRI S VENKATESH S/O LATE SANJEEV MURTHY AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. THIMMEGOWDA N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE MULTI STRIED BUILDING BANGALRE -56 0001 2. THE ASSTAISTANT AGRICULTURAL DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALRE URBAN DISTRICT-562106 3. THE INSPECTOR OF FERTILIZER CUM ASST. AGRICULTURAL DIRECTOR (VIGILANCE -1) OFFICE OF THE JOINT DIRECTOR Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7237 WP No. 3805 of 2025 AGRICULTURE COMPLEX, BANASHAKARI, BANGALORE -560070 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH., AGA) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 27/01/2025 MADE IN CASE NO. PASSED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT, UNDER ANNX-G BY ISSUE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI.GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE OPERATION AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS, PURSUANT TO THE IMPUGNED DATED 27/01/2025 MADE IN CASE PASSED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT UNDER ANNX-G.LA THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER On the previous occasion, this Court had directed the learned counsel for petitioner as well as the learned Additional Government Advocate to find out as to whether there is any appeal remedy available for the petitioner under the provisions of the Fertilizer (Inorganic, Organic or Mixed)(Control) Order, 1985. 2. Today, learned Additional Government Advocate submits while pointing out to Rule 32A of the Order, 1985 - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7237 WP No. 3805 of 2025 that an appeal remedy is available for the petitioner at the State level, before the competent authority, notified by the State Government in the matter of suspension or canceling of the authorization letter. 3. In that view of the matter, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the writ petition is not maintainable, since the alternative efficacious remedy is available for the petitioner. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to submit that the various writ petitions have been considered by this court and therefore this writ petition should also be considered. 5. In the considered opinion of this Court, unless the issue as to whether an appeal remedy available for the petitioner has been raise and considered by this Court and has held that despite such a provision, the writ petition is maintainable, the contention of the learned counsel petitioner cannot be accepted. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:7237 WP No. 3805 of 2025 6. In view of the appeal remedy available for the petitioner, the writ petition stands dismissed, while reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority. 7. Certified copy produced by the petitioner shall be returned, while retaining a copy for the records. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE KLY CT: JL