- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26447 WP No. 33011 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO.33011 OF 2024 (GM-TEN) BETWEEN: SRI. DEEPAK JAYANNA S/O JAYANNA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O. BILVA, 5TH CROSS, ASHOKA NAGAR, TUMAKURU-572 102. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAMESH K.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND FISHERIES, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF FISHERIES 3RD FLOOR, PODIUM BLOCK, VISHWESHWARIAH CENTRE, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001. Digitally signed by PRAKASH N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26447 WP No. 33011 of 2024 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES NEAR MAHATMA GANDHI STADIUM, KUVEMPU NAGAR, TUMAKURU-572 101. 4. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES SIRA TALUK, SIRA, TUMAKURU-572 101. 5. SRI. B.G. YUVARAJU S/O GOPALAPPA, AGED: MAJOR, R/O. BARAGURU, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 113. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R.1 TO R.4; SRI. D.P. MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R.5.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED E-TENDER NOTIFICATION DATED 22.11.2024 BEARING NO.HAGUPA.01/2024-25 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4 AT ANNEXURE-N, IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO MADALURU DODDAKERE OF SIRA TALUK (SL.NO.6 AT ANNEXURE-N) IS CONCERNED, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26447 WP No. 33011 of 2024 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition seeking for issuance of the writ of certiorari to set aside the impugned e-tender notification dated 22.11.2024 issued by the 4th respondent at Annexure – N. Insofar as it relates to Madaluru, Doddakere Lake of Sira Taluk. The petitioner has also sought for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the 4th respondent to award the tender in favour of the petitioner in terms of the notification dated 02.09.2022 for the year 2022-23 to 2026-27, as the petitioner was the highest bidder. 2. The prayer is sought for that the petitioner must not be insisted on payment of the tender amount once again. The case made out by the petitioner is that the petitioner had made his bid for awarding of fishing rights in various tanks of Sira Taluk for the year 2022-23 to 2026-27. It is made out from the facts that the financial bid was opened in which the petitioner was arrayed as the highest bidder in respect of Madaluru, Doddakere lake is concerned. It is - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26447 WP No. 33011 of 2024 submitted that though the petitioner purchased the demand drafts (for short ‘DD's’) towards the bid amount, there was some delay in making over the demand drafts to the authority. In light of such delay on refusal by the authority to accept the said demand drafts, the petitioner approached this Court by way of proceedings in W.P.No.19939/2022. It must be noticed that in the said writ petition proceedings, respondent No.5 herein was also a party, who was arrayed as respondent No.6 in such proceedings. 3. The contention of the petitioner raised herein, which is an assertion on facts that the demand drafts were taken but were not accepted, was a contention noticed by the Court and eventually the Court passed an order after considering all contentions at paragraph No.18 as follows: "(1) Writ Petition is allowed. (ii) Mandamus issues to respondents 1 to 5 to accept demand drafts of the petitioner and award contract in his favour. The contract shall run from the date of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26447 WP No. 33011 of 2024 award of such contract and would be in operation for the term of the contract in terms of the subject tender. The petitioner shall furnish all necessities for award of contract. (iii) H2/respondents 6 and 7 who have invested in developing fish in the tanks are permitted to take the present harvest without any hindrance from any quarter. After harvesting of fish by respondents 6 and 7 is over, the contract shall be awarded in favour of the petitioner. (iv) The aforesaid action shall be concluded within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 4. It is the case of the petitioner that the bid amounts was sought to be made good by way of the demand drafts which were submitted to the authority. Initially, when the bid of the petitioner was rejected, as the demand draft was not submitted in time, the demand drafts however were adjusted to the claim of respondent No.5 herein, Yuvaraju without his consent. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26447 WP No. 33011 of 2024 5. It is the submission that the petitioner now not only is entitled for award of tender but is also entitled for adjustment of the amount remitted through demand drafts earlier which was wrongly adjusted towards claim of Respondent No.5. Accordingly, it is submitted that the grant of relief for giving effect to the tender would not entail any further payment. Admittedly, the order of the learned Single Judge of the Co-ordinate Bench in W.P.No.19939/2022 was not implemented, though time was granted for implementation of the direction within four weeks. 6. Insofar as the entitlement of the petitioner, the same is not in dispute and has been settled by the Co-ordinate Bench in W.P.No.19939/2022. What remains is the moulding of equitable relief, as the right of the petitioner as recognized and declared in W.P.No.19939/2022 and cannot now be left in the lurch without further relief being granted. The delay in implementing the direction of the order is now to be taken note of and the directions in the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26447 WP No. 33011 of 2024 order W.P.No.19939/2022 are to be given effect to. The delay in giving effect to the order would not prejudice the petitioner. 7. Insofar as the assertions of the petitioner regarding the demand drafts furnished by him or on his behalf by persons close to him have been adjusted towards the previous decision to award the tender to Yuvaraju, it is not in dispute. This aspect is further fortified by the proceedings at Annexure – L against the erring officials. As regards the aspect of adjustment of the demand drafts, the observation made in the proceedings, though as regards officials on the service side, the observations would still be of relevance. The relevant observations in the order dated 05.02.2024 passed by respondent No.2 in paragraph No.2, reads as follows: "ಉೇಖ(2)ರ ಾನ ಉಚ ಾಾಲಯದ :20-12-2023ರ ಆೇಶದ HI ಡುಾರೆ ಸದ ೆ!ೆಗ#ೆ ಗು$%ೆ ದೃ'ೕಕರಣ ಆೇಶ *ೊರ,ಸುವಂ/ೆ ಆೇ0ಸಾ1ೆ. ಅದರಂ/ೆ, ಉೇಖ(3)ರ HI ಡುಾರ!ಾದ 03ೕ.ೕಪ5 ಜಯಣ7, ತುಮಕೂರು ರವರು ಈ ;ಂೆ ಕ<ೇೆ ಸ=ದ ನಗದು ಹುಂ,ಗಳನು@ ಪಗA= ೊಂಡು ಮದಲೂರು ಮತು% - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26447 WP No. 33011 of 2024 !ಾಮಂಗಪBರ ೆ!ೆಗ#ೆ ಗು$%ೆ ದೃ'ೕಕರಣ ಆೇಶ Cೕಡುವಂ/ೆ ೋರು/ಾ%!ೆ. ಈ ;ೆ@ೆಯ, ಾನ ಉDಚ ಾಾಲಯದ ಆೇಶದಂ/ೆ H1 ಡುಾರೆ ದೃ'ೕಕರಣ ಆೇಶ CೕಡುವBದಂದ H2 ಡುಾರೆ ಈಾಗೇ HI ಡುಾರರ ನಗದು ಹುಂ,ಗಳನು@ ಸ ಾEರ ೆF ಜG ಾ, GೕಾH ಾಗ#ೆ ಪ3Iಾ%ವೆ ಸ= ಗು$%ೆ ಆೇಶ ಾ,= ೊಂ,ರುವBದಂದ *ಾಗೂ ಪ3ಸು%ತ ಾನ ಉಚ ಾಾಲಯದ ಆೇಶದಂ/ೆ HI ಡುಾರೆ ದೃ'ೕಕರಣ ಆೇಶ CೕಡJೇ ಾ1ದುK ಇದಂಾ1 ಸ ಾEರ ೆF ರೂ:11,59,000/-ಗಳ ನಷNವBಂOಾಗಲು ಾರಣ!ಾ1ರು$%ೕ." 8. Learned Additional Government Advocate further requested that there must be clarity with respect to payment of demand drafts apart from Annexure – L proceedings, which would indicate that the demand drafts given by the petitioner were adjusted to the claim of Yuvaraju. The petitioner has also drawn attention to demand drafts that are produced at Annexure – C series. A perusal of Annexure – D would make it clear that acknowledgment was given to the petitioner herein and the numbers and amounts of the demand drafts are mentioned clearly at serial Nos.1 and 2 on the last page. This document has been acknowledged by the respondent – State. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26447 WP No. 33011 of 2024 9. Though various contentions have been urged by the petitioner regarding the need not to extend the relief at (iii) in the order passed in W.P.No.19939/2022, however, such factual assertion cannot be entered into in the present case. 10. The petitioner has also filed by way of a memo, letters that would indicate that demand drafts have been deposited on his behalf by persons known to him. The same is taken on record. What remains is the moulding of appropriate relief. 11. It is not in dispute that the order in W.P.No.19939/2022 has attained finality. The direction in the said order was to be given effect to during the season of the relevant year. The directions were to be concluded within four weeks. The same not having been done, the only manner of given effect to the order passed which would enure to the benefit of the petitioner and respondent No.5 is by giving prospective effect to the grant of lease rights, which would be an exception to the - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26447 WP No. 33011 of 2024 policy in the peculiar facts of this case. Accordingly, the petition is disposed off. The respondent - State to grant fishing rights to the petitioner for the same period and terms as mentioned in the tender document at Annexure - A. The period contemplated in the tender would start from the fresh fishing season of 1st of August, 2025. 12. Needless to state that the direction in W.P.No.19939/2022 at (iii) would result in respondent No.5 having benefit of the first season, after which the remaining portion of the period as provided for in the tender would enure to the benefit of the petitioner. Needless to state that in light of the findings and discussion made above the petitioner cannot be insisted to make payment once again and the demand drafts furnished are to be taken towards payment made. 13. However, insofar as the yearly lease amount is needless to state in terms of the tender condition, the petitioner is required to comply with the condition. In the event the demand draft has already been furnished, as - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26447 WP No. 33011 of 2024 evidenced by Annexure - D, results in any amount in excess of the initial deposit having been remitted and the same is required to be adjusted towards the yearly lease rents. 14. Insofar as respondent No.5 is concerned, needless to state that the direction at (iii) passed in W.P.No.19939/2022 would require the petitioner to make fresh payment for the benefit under (iii) in light of the direction passed in this matter whereby the petitioner herein is to get the benefit of the demand drafts already deposited. Accordingly, the petition is disposed off. 15. The proposed lease to be granted by the government to the petitioner would be after the lapse of one year. The first-year lease from 1st of August, 2025 to 31st of July, 2026, would be in favour of respondent No.5 in compliance of direction under (iii) in W.P.No.19939/2022 and the government then is to grant leasehold fishing rights to the petitioner for the remaining 4 years as specified in the tender starting from 1st of August, 2026. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26447 WP No. 33011 of 2024 16. Respondent No.5 needless to state, to avail of the benefit of the grant of fishing lease for the first term, first make payment in terms of the tender document within a period of thirty days from today. 17. It is needless to state that in light of the discussion, an order passed the tender notification at Annexure - N is set aside. SD/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE BKN/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40