- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:12767 WP No. 6434 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 6434 OF 2025 (GM-KIADB) BETWEEN: M/S. A.V.VENTURES AND HOLDINGS REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 58(1), INDIAN PARTNERSHIP ACT, 1932 NO.60, 3RD MAIN, 6TH CROSS, KEB/BDA LAYOUT, ASHWATHNAGAR, SANJAYNAGAR MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 094 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR DHANANJAYA. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHIVAPRASAD SHANTANAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:12767 WP No. 6434 of 2025 4TH FLOOR, EAST WING, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACECOURSE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001. 3. MANAGING DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA UDYOG MITRA, NO. 49, 3RD FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVAN (EAST WING), RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI B.VACHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R-2; SMT.SUKRUTHA R., ADVOCATE FOR R-3) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO CONSIDER THE WRITTEN REPRESENTATION DATED 20.12.2021 AT ANNEXURE-C REPRESENTATION DATED 12.04.2022 AT ANNEXURE-C1, REPRESENTATION DATED 05.05.2022 AT ANNEXURE-C2 AND REPRESENTATION DATED 21.02.2025 AT ANNEXURE-D SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER SEEKING ALLOTMENT OF LAND AS APPROVED BY THE DLSWCC, UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:12767 WP No. 6434 of 2025 “a] ISSUE a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent No.2 to consider the written representation dated 20.12.2021 at Annexure C, representation dated 12.04.2022 at Annexure C1, representation dated 05.05.2022 at Annexure C2 and representation dated 21.02.2025 at Annexure-D submitted by the Petitioner seeking allotment of land as approved by the DLSWCC, under the facts and circumstances of the case; b) ISSUE a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent No.2 to allot a suitable plot at Hi-Tech, Defence & Aerospace Park at Devanahalli Industrial Area (PHASE- I) in consonance with the approval accorded by the DLSWCC, under the facts and circumstances of the case; and c) ISSUE any appropriate writ, order or orders or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit to grant, under the facts and circumstances of this case.” 2. Heard Sri Shivaprasad Shantanagoudar, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Mohammed Jaffar Shah, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1, Sri B. Vachan, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and Smt. Sukrutha R., learned counsel for respondent No.3. 3. The petitioner files an application before the 3rd respondent – Karnataka Udyog Mitra for allotment of a plot to set up an industry. It transpires that on 04.11.2019, the District Level Single Window Clearance Committee (for short ‘DLSWCC’) after considering the application of the petitioner - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:12767 WP No. 6434 of 2025 grants approval for allotment of land in Hi-Tech Park, Defence and Aerospace Park, Devanahalli Industrial Area. After the said allotment, the Board has not allotted any plot to the petitioner and the representations of the petitioner galore for such allotment. The representations having not considered by the respondents, has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition. 4. Sri B. Vachan, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 would submit that if reasonable time is granted, the representations of the petitioner would be considered in terms of approval of the DLSWCC and appropriate orders would be passed in accordance with law. 5. Sri Shivaprasad Shantanagoudar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the representations at Annexures ‘C’, ‘C1’ and ‘C2’, which are all seeking refund, he would not press those representations. Hence, those representations are withdrawn as not pressed. 6. In that light, I deem it appropriate to dispose the petition, directing the respondent - Board to consider the representation at Annexure ‘D’ and pass necessary orders in - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:12767 WP No. 6434 of 2025 accordance with law, within an outer limit of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not earlier. 7. With the aforesaid direction, the petition stands disposed. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE NVJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16