- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:13958 WP No. 22439 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 22439 OF 2024 (APMC) BETWEEN: M/S B K S ENTERPRISES R/O SHOP 19/31, COCONUT COMPLEX, A P M C YARD, YESHWANTHPURA, BENGALURU 560 022 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, MR M SRINIVAS, PROPRIETERSHIP …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K. V. SATEESHCHANDRA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DIRECTOR OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL MARKETING, NO. 16, 2ND RAJBHAVAN, ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE SECRETARY THE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE, MAHATMA GANDHI COMPLEX, YESHWANTHPURA, BENGALURU - 560 022. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.VAHEEDA, AGA FOR R1; SRI. T. SWAROOP, ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:13958 WP No. 22439 of 2024 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE BERING NO.KIUMASA(BE)/LE AND LE/38/2023.24 DATED 04.04.2024 ISSUED BY THE R2, VIDE ANNX-E; DIRECTING THE R2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 30.04.2024 OF THE PETITIONER AS ANNX-F; DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO ISSUE PASS TO THE ENTRY OF VEHICLES BRINGING PRODUCE TO THE PETITIONER; DECLARING THE ACTION OF THE R2 IN ENTRY OF VEHICLES BRINGING PRODUCE TO THE PETITIONER BY NON-ISSUANCE OF GATE IS ILLEGAL. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioner is licensed by the second respondent to conduct business in onion and potato. The petitioner is aggrieved by the second respondent's Notice dated 04.04.2024 (Annexure-E). The second respondent has issued this Notice to the petitioner informing the petitioner that after he was served with Notice dated 29.12.2023 (Annexure-C) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:13958 WP No. 22439 of 2024 calling upon him to pay a sum of Rs. 7,54,996/-, he has deposited a sum of Rs.25,000/- by RTGS which is adjusted towards the License fee for the months of February and March 2018 with GST and the remaining sum of Rs.6,828/- is adjusted towards the penalty. The second respondent has also informed the petitioner that if the balance payable in terms of the earlier Notice is not paid, action will be taken in accordance with law. 2. Sri K V Sateeshchandra, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner defaulted in paying License fee only because of Covid- 19 restrictions, but once those restrictions were eased, he has paid dues in parts. The learned counsel further submits that because the second respondent stopped issuing gate passes which would be the first requirement to continue business in the Market yard, he has not been able to pay the arrears or be in business. Crucially, the learned counsel submits that - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:13958 WP No. 22439 of 2024 if reasonable time is granted, the petitioner will clear the dues, but this Court must direct the second respondent to issue gate pass forthwith so that he can commence his business and have a reasonable opportunity to pay the license fee and the demand otherwise. 3. Sri T Swaroop, the learned counsel for the second respondent, submits that the petitioner is in default from the year 2016 onwards and gate pass is refused only in February 2022, that the petitioner did not take any step even thereafter to clear the dues and the penalty, and as such, Notice dated 29.12.2023 (Annexure-C) is issued, and that even after receipt of this notice, the petitioner has only paid a sum of Rs.25,000/-. The learned counsel emphasizes that even if the petitioner is to be granted any reasonable indulgence, this Court must ensure that the petitioner abides by the decision that would - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:13958 WP No. 22439 of 2024 ultimately be in terms of the Orders of this Court in the pending writ petition with no arrears. 4. The pivotal submission is that despite this Court's reasonable indulgence, the petitioner could continue to be in default, and hence he cannot be accommodated in the alternative sub market yard (Dasanapura sub-market yard), and that the petitioner must, within stipulated time, clear all dues in terms of the Notice (Annexure-C), and the upto date amount payable as of that relevant date. 5. This Court must observe that the second respondent, though has issued Notice dated 29.12.2023 (Annexure-C), and the impugned Notice dated 04.04.2024 (Annexure-E), has not taken further action for cancellation of license and recovery of the premises. This allows a window to the petitioner, if bona fide is shown, to pay the amount outstanding in terms of the Notice dated 29.12.2023 and further amount that would be due notwithstanding his case - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:13958 WP No. 22439 of 2024 that he has not been able to conduct business from the month of February 2022. 6. When queried Sri K. V. Sateeshchandra submits that the petitioner will deposit 25% of the dues as aforesaid within two months and clear the remaining dues within the next one year, while emphasizing that this Court must direct the second respondent to allow concession in the License fee, which is allowed to others for Covid-19 period. In reply, Sri T. Swaroop, is categorical that no concession in the License fee is allowed to any person as there was no closure of business even during Covid-19. 7. Be this as it may, the petitioner, who has been in default from the year 2016 and who has had a rather extended opportunity, cannot seek for further indulgence. The petitioner must pay 25% of the dues as aforesaid within two [2] months and the remaining amount within the next six [6] months - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:13958 WP No. 22439 of 2024 unless it becomes necessary in terms of the other pending writ proceedings to pay all dues much earlier if he is to be accommodated in terms of the outcome in such proceedings. If the petitioner deposits 25% of the amount, the second respondent must post-haste issue the gate pass so that there is no hindrance to the petitioner to commence business. In the light of the afore, the following: - ORDER [a] The petition stands disposed of permitting the petitioner to deposit within two [2] months from today, without waiting for a certified copy of this order, 25% of the dues as mentioned in the Notice (Annexure-C) and the subsequent dues that would be. [b] If the petitioner deposits 25% as aforesaid, the second respondent shall immediately - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:13958 WP No. 22439 of 2024 issue gate pass and enable the petitioner to commence his business. [c] The petitioner shall pay the remaining dues as aforesaid within the next six [6] months subject to the condition that if the petitioner proposes to retain the benefits that could be by way of accommodation in Dasanapura sub-market yard in terms of the orders in the pending proceedings, as of such date, the petitioner must clear all dues which would be the outer limit. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE AN/-