Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29188 WP No. 53733 of 2017 C/W WP No. 32211 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 53733 OF 2017 (GM-KSSIDC) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 32211 OF 2017 (GM-KSSIDC)
IN WP No. 53733/2017 BETWEEN:
SMT. MANJULA W/O RAMACHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/A GODABANAHAL CHITRADURGA TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577501 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.K. MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF SMALL SCALE INDUSTRIES M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001
2. THE KARNATAKA STATE SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE-560072, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
3. THE PRESIDENT DISTRICT SINGLE WINDOW COMMITTEE AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, CHITRADURGA-577501. Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29188 WP No. 53733 of 2017 C/W WP No. 32211 of 2017
4. MEMBER-SECRETARY DISTRICT SINGLE WINDOW COMMITTEE AND JOINT DIRECTOR, DISTRICT INDUSTRIAL CENTRE CHITRADURGA-577501 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. SRINIVAS KUMAR, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1, 3 AND 4;
SMT. LAKSHMI S. HOLLA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO ALLOT SHED NO.D-36 SITUATE AT CHITRADURGA INDUSTRIAL AREA TO THE PETITIONER AS PER THE RESOLUTION PASSED BY THE 3RD AND 4TH RESPONDENTS VIDE ANNEXURE-F DATED 30.05.2016. IN WP NO. 32211/2017 BETWEEN:
FASEEHA BANU W/O MOHAMED SAMI ULLA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, BEHIND MADEENA MUNAVARA MASIDI, CHOLAGUDA 1ST CROSS, CHITRADURGA-577 501 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR P.V., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR K.S.S.I.D.C. LTD., INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 010. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER/ CHAIRMAN DISTRICT, SINGLE WINDOW COMMITTEE,
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29188 WP No. 53733 of 2017 C/W WP No. 32211 of 2017
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, CHITRADURGA-577 501
3. THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, KHANIJA BHAVANA, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 004. 4. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE/ MEMBER SECRETARY, DISTRICT SINGLE WINDOW COMMITTEE, JOGIMATTI ROAD, CHITRADURGA-577 501
5. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER K.S.S.I.D.C. LTD, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, HARIHAR-577 601 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. SRINIVAS KUMAR, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 TO 4;
SMT. SUMANGALA GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.
GURUDEV GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 5) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE SINGLE WINDOW COMMITTEE MEETING RESOLUTION NO.2.3 PASSED IN ITS MEETING DATED 23.05.2017 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-J REPRESENTED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29188 WP No. 53733 of 2017 C/W WP No. 32211 of 2017
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner in W.P. No.53733/2017 has sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to the respondents to allot industrial shed No.D-36 situate at Chitradurga industrial area to her as per the resolution passed by the respondent Nos.3 and 4 dated 30.05.2016. 2. The petitioner in W.P No.32211/2017 has challenged the resolution dated 23.05.2017 at subject No.2.3 passed by the District Single Window Committee. She has sought for a direction to the respondent No.1 to allot the shed bearing No.D-36 at Chitradurga Industrial Estate, Chitradurga to the eligible / valid applicants who filed applications in response to the advertisement at Annexure ‘A’ to the petition. 3. The Karnataka State Small Industries Development Corporation Limited (‘KSSIDC’ for short) had published a notification inviting applications from eligible candidates for allotment of sites, shops, industrial sheds etc. Amongst the various locations advertised, the KSSIDC had invited applications for allotment of industrial shed bearing D-36 at
- 5 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29188 WP No. 53733 of 2017 C/W WP No. 32211 of 2017
Chitradurga Industrial Estate. In response to this notification, the petitioner/s in both these writ petitions had submitted her/their respective applications seeking allotment of the said industrial shed. The notification did not prescribe that persons belonging to the reserved categories would be considered for allotment of the industrial shed bearing No.D-36. 4. The petitioner in W.P. No.53733/2017 who belonged to scheduled caste claimed that after she filed the application, a resolution was passed by the respondent Nos.3 and 4 / the President and Member-Secretary of the District Single Window Committee to allot the shed to her on the ground that she belonged to scheduled caste. She contended that despite such a resolution, the industrial shed was not allotted to her. She submitted a representation to KSSIDC through the Minister for Industries, Government of Karnataka on 04.11.2016 requesting it to allot her the industrial shed No.D-36 as per the resolution stated above. However, the said representation was not considered. She thereafter filed an application before the KSSIDC seeking information whether the industrial shed No.D-36 was allotted to any person. The KSSIDC in reply issued an endorsement dated 26.04.2017
- 6 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29188 WP No. 53733 of 2017 C/W WP No. 32211 of 2017
stating that the industrial shed bearing No.D-36 which was notified for public auction on 22.12.2016 was cancelled.
The petitioner claimed that after the notification was cancelled, the industrial shed No.D-36 is not allotted to any person. Therefore, she prays that a direction be issued to the respondents to allot the industrial shed No.D-36 to her. 5. On the other hand, the petitioner in W.P.No.32211/2017 has questioned the resolution dated 23.05.2017 passed by the District Single Window Committee resolving to allot the industrial shed bearing No.D-36 to a person belonging to the scheduled caste on the ground that during the previous allotments, sufficient number of industrial sheds were not allotted to persons belonging to scheduled castes. The petitioner contends that when the notification was published by the KSSIDC, it was not mentioned that industrial shed No.D-36 is reserved for allotment to persons belonging to scheduled castes. Therefore, she contends that the KSSIDC or the District Single Window Committee could not have reserved the industrial shed No.D-36 after applications were submitted by the applicants for prospective allotment. Therefore, the impugned resolution passed by the District Single Window
- 7 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29188 WP No. 53733 of 2017 C/W WP No. 32211 of 2017
Committee in so far as it relates to subject No.2.3 is challenged and direction is sought to the KSSIDC to allot the industrial shed No.D36, Chitradurga industrial Estate, Chitradurga, to eligible candidates who had submitted their application pursuant to the notification dated 24.08.2015, which was published in 'Vijayavani', Kannada daily newspaper on
27.08.2015. 6. The KSSIDC has filed statement of objections in W.P. No.32211/2017 contending inter alia that as per the decision of the Single Window Committee ('SWC' for short) and District Level Single Window Agency ('DLSWA' for short) at the meeting held on 30.05.2016, it was decided to allot shed No.D- 36 to Smt. G. Manjula. However, since such allotment was not in accordance with the allotment Rules, the Board of KSSIDC decided to put up the shed for auction amongst the applicants.
Accordingly, the shed was auctioned on 22.12.2016 and Smt.Kavita emerged as the highest bidder. The auction proceedings was placed before the DLSWA at the meeting held on 27.12.2016 for confirmation. The Deputy Commissioner, Chitradurga who is the Chairman of the DLSWA informed the Board of KSSIDC to take a decision at its end as the auction
- 8 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29188 WP No. 53733 of 2017 C/W WP No. 32211 of 2017
was held without bringing it to the notice of the SWC. Thereafter, the Board of KSSIDC took a decision to re-notify the shed for allotment and the bid of Smt. Kavita was not confirmed. It contended that Smt. G.Manjula filed W.P.No.53733/2017 for a direction to the respondents therein to confirm the allotment of the industrial shed No.D-36 to her, where an interim order was granted directing KSSIDC not to allot it to any person. Later, the DLSWA has decided to cancel the notification and re-notify the shed for allotment by reserving it for women belonging to scheduled castes. It therefore contended that it would abide by any orders that may be passed by this Court. 7.
Learned counsel for the respective petitioner in both these petitions reiterated the contentions urged in their respective petition/s and submitted that the petitioner in W.P No.53733/2017, who belongs to scheduled caste is entitled to be allotted the industrial shed No.D-36 while the learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P No.32211/2017 submits that the KSSIDC is bound to allot the industrial shed based on the subjective satisfaction as to who is more eligible to be allotted. - 9 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29188 WP No. 53733 of 2017 C/W WP No. 32211 of 2017
8. Per contra, the State Government has filed a statement of objections in both the petitions stating that the industrial shed bearing No.D-36 was notified by the KSSIDC for the general category and that the Single Window Committee at its meeting, resolved to notify the industrial shed No.D-36 to a woman entrepreneur belonging to scheduled caste. 9. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective petitioner in both the petitions, learned High Court Government Pleader and learned counsel for the contesting respondent/s in both the petitions. 10. A perusal of the notification dated 24.08.2015 issued by the KSSIDC which was published in ‘Vijayavani’, Kannada daily newspaper on 27.08.2015 inviting applications from the eligible candidates for allotment of various industrial plots and sheds shows that industrial shed No.D-36 at Chitradurga industrial Estate was also notified for allotment. The notification did not disclose that it was reserved for any category though many other industrial plots and sheds were reserved for various categories. It is, therefore, evident that the industrial shed No.D-36 was available to all candidates. It
- 10 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29188 WP No. 53733 of 2017 C/W WP No. 32211 of 2017
appears that at a meeting of the District Level Single Window Committee held on 30.05.2016, it was resolved to reserve industrial shed No.D-36 to an entrepreneur belonging to scheduled caste as in the previous allotments, a lesser number of allotments were made to persons belonging to scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. Therefore, it was resolved to allot industrial shed No.D-36 to the petitioner in W.P. No.53733/2017. Thereafter, a meeting of the District Level Single Window Committee was held on 19.02.2016 whereat it was noticed that there were six applicants seeking allotment of the industrial shed No.D-36 and it was resolved to auction the industrial shed.
The petitioner in W.P. No.32211/2017 was informed by a letter dated 22.03.2016 about the auction proposed to be held in respect of the industrial shed No.D-36 on 30.03.2016 at the office of the Joint Director, District Industries Centre, Chitradurga. The said auction was not held on 30.03.2016. The auction was thereafter postponed to 22.12.2016 at the office of the Joint Director, District Industries Centre, Chitradurga. It appears that one of the applicants, namely, Smt. Kavita was the highest bidder, but her bid was not confirmed which is evident from a letter dated 26.04.2017
- 11 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29188 WP No. 53733 of 2017 C/W WP No. 32211 of 2017
addressed to the petitioner in W.P No.32211/2017 by the Assistant General Manager, KSSIDC, and it was informed that the auction dated 22.12.2016 was cancelled. It was further informed that the allotment proceedings shall continue as per the order of the KSSIDC. The petitioner in W.P.No.32211/2017 contends that the respondent No.1 was bound to continue and conclude the allotment proceedings as per the publication caused in the newspaper. However, the District Single Window Committee had decided to notify the industrial shed No.D-36 for a scheduled caste woman and directed the KSSIDC to publish a notification. The petitioner in W.P. No.32211/2017 has, therefore, challenged the resolution dated 23.05.2017 passed by the District Single Window Committee in so far as it relates to subject No.2.3 and has sought for a direction to the respondent No.1 therein to allot the shed to the eligible applicants as per the initial notification issued by the KSSIDC dated 24.08.2015, which was published in 'Vijayavani', Kannada daily newspaper on 27.08.2015. 11.
The petitioner in W. P No.53733/2017, cannot compel the KSSIDC to allot industrial shed No.D-36 situate at Chitradurga Industrial Estate to her pursuant to the resolution
- 12 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29188 WP No. 53733 of 2017 C/W WP No. 32211 of 2017
of the District Single Window Committee dated 30.05.2016 as KSSIDC had already taken out further proceedings and had decided to auction the industrial shed amongst the applicants, who had submitted their applications. Therefore, the petitioner in W.P. No.53733/2017 cannot compel the respondents to allot the industrial shed No.D-36 to her on the premise that the District Single Window Committee had passed a resolution that it should be allotted to a woman entrepreneur belonging to scheduled caste. If once the KSSIDC had notified the industrial shed No.D-36 to the General Category, the District Single Window Committee could not have usurped the power to reserve it for scheduled caste. Therefore, the case of the petitioner in W.P No.53733/2017 has to fail. 12. In so far as the petitioner in W.P. No.32211/2017 is concerned, the KSSIDC had taken a policy decision to cancel the proposal to allot the industrial shed No.D-36. It is now well settled that no person has a valid right to compel the KSSIDC to go on with the allotment process as no right is concluded by mere filing of an application for allotment. Likewise, if the KSSIDC has decided to cancel the process, the petitioner in W.P No.32211/2017 cannot compel the KSSIDC to allot the
- 13 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29188 WP No. 53733 of 2017 C/W WP No. 32211 of 2017
industrial shed to the applicants, who had filed their application pursuant to the initial notification issued by the KSSIDC dated 24.08.2015, which was published in 'Vijayavani', Kannada daily newspaper on 27.08.2015. 13. In that view of the matter, W.P No.53733/2017 is dismissed while W.P. No.32211/2017 is allowed in part.
The KSSIDC is directed to issue a fresh publication to allot the industrial shed No.D-36 situate at Chitradurga Industrial Estate, Chitradurga, in accordance with law within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified of this Order. It is needless to mention that any amount received from the respective petitioner in both the petitions shall be reimbursed to her/them by the KSSIDC forthwith. It is always open for the respective petitioner in both the petitions to participate in the process of allotment as may be notified by KSSIDC, in accordance with law. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE
sma /List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38