Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 24746 (KAR)

M/S JI HAZOOR v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/12665/2017 · 2025-03-12

Suraj Govindaraj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10426 WP No. 12665 of 2017 C/W WP No. 12425 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 12665 OF 2017 (GM-KIADB) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 12425 OF 2017 (GM-KIADB) WRIT PETITION NO. 14357 OF 2017 (GM-KIADB) IN WP No. 12665/2017 (GM-KIADB) BETWEEN: M/S JI HAZOOR HAVING ITS BUSINESS AT CORPORATION NO.522, SITE NO.95 IPIP INDUSTRIAL AREA, 2ND BLOCK, WHITE FIELD, BANGALORE REPRESENTED BY PROPRIETOR SRI. ANMOL SAIGAL …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BADRI VISHAL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY VIKASA SOUDHA AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE – 560 001. 2. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10426 WP No. 12665 of 2017 C/W WP No. 12425 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER BOARD # 49, 4TH AND 5TH FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVANA, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R1; SRI. ASHOK N NAYAK FOR R2) THIS W.P. FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE R-2 DATED 08.02.2017 BEARING NO. KA.KAI.PRA.A.MAM/A.A&KAA.A-2/2644/2016-17 VIDE ANNEX- A. IN WP NO. 12425/2017 (GM-KIADB) BETWEEN: 1. M/S KRITUNGA RESTAURANT HAVING ITS BUSINESS AT CORPORATION NO. 522, SITE NO. 95 IPIP INDUSTRIAL AREA 2ND BLOCK, WHITE FIELD BANGALORE - 560 066. REPRESENTED BY PROPRIETOR T. SHARATHKUMAR REDDY. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. BADRI VISHAL, ADVOCATE) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10426 WP No. 12665 of 2017 C/W WP No. 12425 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY VIKASA SOUDHA AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD #49, 4TH AND 5TH FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVANA RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R1; SRI. ASHOK N NAYAK FOR R2) THIS W.P. FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE R-2 DATED 08.02.2017 BEARING NO. KA.KAI.PRA.A.MAM/A.A&KAA.A- 2/2650/2016-17 VIDE ANNEXURE-A. IN WP NO. 14357/2017 (GM-KIADB) BETWEEN: 1. M/S SOUTHERN SPICES HAVING ITS BUSINESS AT CORPORATION NO. 522, SITE NO. 95 IPIP INDUSTRIAL AREA 2ND BLOCK, WHITEFIELD BANGALORE – 560 066. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10426 WP No. 12665 of 2017 C/W WP No. 12425 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER REPRESENTED BY PROPRIETOR SRI. B. RAMPRASAD ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. BADRI VISHAL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY VIKASA SOUDHA AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE – 560 001. 2. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD # 49, 4TH & 5TH FLOOR KHANIJA BHAVANA RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU – 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R1; SRI. ASHOK N NAYAK FOR R2) THIS WP FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY R-2 DATED 15.03.2017 AT BEARING NO. KA.KAI.PRA.A.MAM/A.A&KAA.A-2/3040/ 2016-17 ANNEX-A. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:10426 WP No. 12665 of 2017 C/W WP No. 12425 of 2017 AND 1 OTHER ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking following reliefs: a. “Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or order and quash the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent, dated 08.02.2017 bearing No. KA. KAI. PRA. A. MAM/ A.A & KAA. A-2/2650/2016-17 vide Annexure-A; b. Issue any other writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper under the circumstances of this case in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitions are rendered infructuous. 3. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitions are dismissed as having become infructuous. 4. In view of the dismissal of the petitions, pending I.A’s. do not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the same are disposed of. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE JS, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21