- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49293 WP No. 1645 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.1645 OF 2020 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION NO.8, CUNNINGHAM ROAD BENGALURU - 560052 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MAHAMMED TAHIR A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY. 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT M S BUILDING BENGALURU - 560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECREATARY. 3. CENTRAL PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MYSORE CENTRAL DIVISION NIRMAN BHAVAN Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49293 WP No. 1645 of 2020 T NARASIPURA ROAD SIDDARTHANAGAR MYSURU - 570011 REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R1 & R2; SRI. H. SHANTHI BHUSHAN, DSGI FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 18.04.2017 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-H. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER 1. In this writ petition, petitioner is assailing the order dated 18.04.2017 (Annexure-H) issued by respondent No.2. 2. I have heard Sri. A. Mahammed Tahir, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Mahantesh Shettar, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49293 WP No. 1645 of 2020 3. It is the case of the petitioner that respondent No.2 has committed an error in transferring the godown which was allotted in favour of the petitioner by the respondent - State, as per the registered Sale Deed dated 09.11.2006. 4. Sri. A. Mahammed Tahir, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that, respondent No.2 has arbitrarily exercised power to transfer the godown which was being utilised by the petitioner as per the registered Sale Deed dated 09.11.2006 executed in favour of petitioner vide Annexure-G. However, the respondent No.2 has erroneously transferred the same in favour of respondent No.1 which requires to be interfered with in this writ petition. 5. Per contra, Sri. Mahantesh Shettar, learned Additional Government Advocate, reiterates the averments made in the statement of objections, however, specifically took up a contention that the soil testing lab has been sanctioned by the Central Government two years ago in which it is forthcoming that the agriculturist will grow appropriate crops in the soil and accordingly, the order at Annexure-H has been passed and therefore, sought for dismissal of the petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49293 WP No. 1645 of 2020 6. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is not in dispute that the petitioner herein is an instrumentality of the respondent - Government. Apart from this, in terms of the Government Order dated 06.09.2006, certain godowns in the State were transferred in favour of the petitioner as per Annexure-F. It is also to be noted that as per Annexure-G, registered Sale Deed was executed by the State Government in favour of the petitioner herein in respect of the subject land for the purpose of storage of the fertilizers of the petitioner - Federation is concerned. In that view of the matter, taking into consideration the registered Sale Deed dated 09.11.2006 has been made as per Annexure-G to the writ petition, I am of the view that, without withdrawing the earlier Government order and that apart, taking into consideration the registered Sale Deed dated 09.11.2006(Annexure-G) has been executed in favour of the petitioner, the impugned order dated 18.04.2017 (Annexure-H) has been passed by respondent No.2 without application of mind, and therefore, I find force in the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49293 WP No. 1645 of 2020 7. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The order dated 18.04.2017 (Annexure-H) issued by respondent No.2 is hereby quashed. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE sac List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23