- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31019 WP No. 18389 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 18389 OF 2021 (APMC) BETWEEN: M/s. NAKODA TRADING COMPANY NO.90/2, A-BLOCK, 3RD CROSS APMC YARD, BANDIPALYA MYSURU - 570 025. REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI BALWATH RAM S/O SAMARA TAJI AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS. …PETITIONER (BY SRI B.R. SATENAHALLI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF COOPERATION, SECRETARY, VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURAL MARKETING NO.16, II, RAJ BHAVAN ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. 3. THE SECRETARY, THE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE, MARKET YARD, BANDIPALYA, MYSURU - 570 025. Digitally signed by GEETHAKUMARI PARLATTAYA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31019 WP No. 18389 of 2021 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MYSORE DISTRICT, MYSORE - 570 025. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI JAYALINGAYYA MUDDENOORMATH, AGA FOR R1 & R4; SRI T.SWAROOP, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENT NO.4 - DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TO TAKE BACK PROPERTY FROM THE POSSESSION OF THE MARKET COMMITTEE WITH RESPECT TO SY.NO.10/1 MEASURING 09 GUNTAS CULMINATING THE LAKE AND LAKE BED AREA AND ETC., THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B-GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed for following reliefs: "a) ISSUE a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction, directing the 4th Respondent-Deputy Commissioner to take back property from the possession of the market committee with respect to Survey No.10/1, measuring 09 guntas, culminating the lake and lake bed area and to maintain the manage in accordance with the guiding principles issued by this Hon'ble Court by a judgment dated 15.06.2021 passed by this Hon'ble Court in Writ Petition No.817 of 2008 (GM-RES-PIL) and implement the provisions of the Karnataka Tank Conservation and Development Authority Act, 2014, vide ANNEXURE-D; b) ISSUE a writ of certiorari or any other writ, quashing the order dated 22.7.2021 vide bearing - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31019 WP No. 18389 of 2021 No.KruMaAa/AbhiVe-2/LiKum.Se/224/2012, passed by the Respondent No.2, as per ANNEXURE-C; c) ISSUE a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction, directing the market committee to redo the allotment proceedings afresh, including making the seniority list in accordance with Clause No.8 of the Karnataka Agricultural Marketing (Regulation of Allotment of Property in Market yards) Rules, 2004 and etc." 2. Sri B.R.Satenahalli, learned counsel for petitioner submitted, petitioner was trader having obtained licence from respondent no.2. In 2010, respondent no.3-Market Committee had issued notification calling for application for allotment of shop-cum-godown. In pursuance of same, petitioner had filed application on 01.09.2004 for allotment of site in 'A' block. Said application was pending with Market Committee till date and even amount paid along with application was not yet refunded. It was submitted, respondent no.3-Market Committee had issued another notification on 02.02.2021 as per Annexure-A. In pursuance of same, petitioner filed one more application for allotment on 26.02.2021 expressing first preference for allotment to site no.295-C, second preference to site no.325-A and third preference was for site no.C-51 and he was allotted site no.487 in 'B' block. However, on verification, he found allotted area was lake area converted into sites fraudulently. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31019 WP No. 18389 of 2021 Said list was approved by respondent no.2 under Annexure-C without proper verification. It was submitted, as per Google Satellite Image map produced as Annexure-H series, land in Sy.nos.10 and 10/1 of Chamundi Betta, Mysuru, were lake area. It was submitted, this Court in W.P.no.817/2008 (GM-RES-PIL) disposed of on 15.06.2021 issued directions for implementation of provisions of Karnataka Tank Conservation and Development Authority Act, 2014 ('Act' for short). Provisions of said Act require authority namely, Deputy Commissioner to take action against encroachment and for preservation of lake. Therefore, petitioner filed present writ petition. 3. Learned AGA for respondents no.1 and 4 and Sri T.Swaroop, learned counsel for respondents no.2 and 3 opposed writ petition. It was submitted, by referring to their respective statement of objections while denying it to be so, whether lands in Sy.nos.10 and 10/1 were lake area, it would be a disputed question of fact. It was submitted, land was duly acquired, developed and market area was formed. It was submitted, even if it was open for petitioner to contend or claim that any portion of market area was lake, same was not - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31019 WP No. 18389 of 2021 substantiated and petitioner being one of allottees in Annexure- C, could not maintain writ petition challenging same. 4. Heard learned counsel and perused writ petition records. 5. From above, petitioner's claim for direction to respondent no.4 to take back 9 guntas in Sy.no.10/1 of Chamundi Betta, Mysuru, is based on his assertion that it was lake-bed area and failure of respondent no.4 to take necessary action to prevent encroachment and take steps for restoration. Said assertion is denied and disputed by respondents, who claimed that lands in Sy.nos.10 and 10/1 were duly notified, acquired and market area was formed and same is sought to be supported by village maps, revenue records, land acquisition documents, etc. 6. It is settled law that before seeking writ of mandamus directing authorities to take action, petitioner would require to establish legal right corresponding legal duty in authorities, demand having been made and refusal/deemed refusal by authorities. In instant case, there is no material placed on record by petitioner to establish said factors. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31019 WP No. 18389 of 2021 7. Even insofar as challenge to Annexure-C, same would be available only after determination of petitioner's claim that lands in Sy.nos.10 and 10/1 of Chamundi Betta, Mysuru, were lake area. 8. In view of above and taking note of provisions of Sections 5 and 6 of Act, writ petition is disposed of reserving liberty to petitioner to make representation before respondent no.4/appropriate authority to enquire whether lands in Sy.nos.10 and 10/1 of Chamundi Betta, Mysuru, are lake area, and whether any portion of it is utilized for formation of market area/market yard before taking action for its restoration, in accordance with law. Needless to observe that respondents no.2 and 3 would require to be heard in process of determination and entail to be intimated about results thereof. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE AV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26