- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4161 WP No. 13417 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 13417 OF 2024 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI DEVENDRAPPA S/O. BASAVANNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, NARASAPURA VILLAGE AND POST, SHIKARIPURA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA-577 428. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. HITESH GOWDA.BJ., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER NARASAPURA VILLAGE PANCHAYAT, SHIKARIPURA, SHIVAMOGGA-577 427. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. B J SOMAYAJI., ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA., PRAYING TO ORDER OR DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENT TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 20.03.2023 (ANNEXURE-H) AND TO ISSUE WRIT OR ANY SUCH ORDER OR DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENT TO RENEW THE LICENSE OF PETITIONER, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4161 WP No. 13417 of 2024 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the endorsement dated 20.03.2023, whereby the Grama Panchayat has decided not to renew the licence of the petitioner since there is no unanimity amongst the members of the Grama Panchayat for the renewal of the licence. 2. The petitioner was granted a licence to run a flour mill way-back in the year 1999 and this licence was renewed periodically. However, in the year 2022, it appears that objections were raised regarding the renewal of licnece and this question was considered in two meetings, where members of the Grama Panchayat were at variance with each other; while in one meeting, some members opposed the renewal and in another meeting, a large number of members approved for renewal subject to the petitioner obtaining a new machinery to run his flour mill. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4161 WP No. 13417 of 2024 3. In my view, the renewal of a licence cannot be determined on the whims of the members of a Grama Panchayat, more so when the licence has been in existence for nearly 25 years. The Grama Panchayat could not have refused the renewal merely because there was no unanimity amongst its members. 4. As already stated above, since the petitioner had the benefit of a licnece for more than 25 years, unless there is strong reason in law which prohibits renewal, the Grama Panchayat could not have refused the renewal. 5. Admittedly, there is nothing forthcoming in the impugned order which indicates that the flour mill is causing any kind of unbearable nuisance to the villagers. 6. I am therefore of the view that the impugned order cannot be sustained and the same is accordingly quashed. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4161 WP No. 13417 of 2024 7. A direction is issued to the respondent to renew the licence of the petitioner, as had been done before for the past 25 years. 8. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE RK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 71