- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15545 WP No. 14358 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.14358 OF 2022 (APMC) BETWEEN: SHREE GURU RENUKA RICE INDUSTRIES REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, B.M. NANJAIAH, S/O B.M. BASAVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS, R/AT MALEBENNUR, HARIHARA TALUK, DAVANAGERE-577530. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SHILPA RANI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDINGS, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING, NO.16/2, RAJBHAVAN ROAD, BENGALURU-560001. 3. AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE, HARIHARA-577601 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI RAO, HCGP FOR R-1 & R-2; SMT. T. SWAROOP, ADVOCATE FOR R-3) Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15545 WP No. 14358 of 2022 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE FINAL NOTICE DATED 20.05.2022 IN NOTICE NO.KruMaE/KruVUMaSa (Ha) / 156/2022-23 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT AND LETTER NO. KurMaE/NiYaVi/Appeal/02/2022 DATED 01.06.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT THE COPIES OF WHICH ARE PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-K & M RESPECTIVELY AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: “(i) ISSUE a writ of certiorari or any other writ or direction quashing the Final Notice dated 20.05.2022 in Notice No. KruMaE/KruVUMaSa (Ha)/156/2022-23 passed by the 3rd respondent and letter No. KruMaE/NiYaVi/ Appeal/02/2022 dated 01.06.2022 issued by the 2nd respondent the copies of which are produced at Annexure-K & M respectively in the ends of justice. (i-a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ quashing the order No. KruMaE/KruUMaSa(Ha)/685/2022-23 dated 09.11.2022 issued by the Respondent No.3, a copy of which is produced at Annexure-S, in the interest of justice and equity. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15545 WP No. 14358 of 2022 (ii) ISSUE a writ of mandamus or any other writ directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 20-06-2022 a copy of which is produced at Annexure-N to meet the ends of justice. (iii) ISSUE a writ of mandamus or any other writ directing the respondents to conduct an enquiry and decide that the paddy purchased by the petitioner from different traders within the State for which Form No.35B produced is not liable for market fee and 3 times penalty under Section 83 A of the APMC Act. (iv) ISSUE a writ of mandamus or any other writ directing the respondents To conduct enquiry and decide that that Rice purchased from different trades with in State of Karnataka is suffered/exempted market fee on paddy in respective market committees and petitioner is not liable for such levy of market fee on purchase of Rice. (v) ISSUE a writ of mandamus or any other writ directing the respondents To conduct enquiry and decide that that Rice sold produced by processing of paddy imported from outside the State petitioner is not liable for payment of market fee as it is not realised from Purchaser. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15545 WP No. 14358 of 2022 (vi) Issue any other writ or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents-APMC. 3. The petitioner, a licenced trader engaged in the business of paddy and rice, was issued with a final notice dated 20.05.2022 (Annexure-K), directing payment of ` 2,41,43,230/- towards market fee and penalty assessed under Section 83A of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) Act, 1966 (referred to as ‘Act’ for short). 4. During the pendency of the proceedings, respondent No.3 passed a confirmatory order dated 09.11.2022 (Annexure-S), which came to be challenged by way of amendment to the writ petition. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 09.11.2022 (Annexure-S) is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15545 WP No. 14358 of 2022 passed without considering the objections filed by the petitioner (Annexure-N) and the authorities have failed to consider Form No.35B produced by the petitioner in support of exemption dated 10.11.2021 (Annexure-C). It is submitted that the order suffers from violation of principles of natural justice, as no proper enquiry was conducted before confirming the demand. It is submitted that the demand of market fee and penalty is arbitrary and contrary to statutory provisions. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.3 sought to justify the impugned order and submits that that the impugned order is passed after considering the material on record and that the petitioner has failed to comply with the statutory requirements and hence, the demand is justified. 7. This Court has carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the material on record. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15545 WP No. 14358 of 2022 8. On perusal of the material on record and the impugned order at Annexure-S, the relevant portion of which is culled out as under: “ªÉÄîÌAqÀ vÀBSÉÛAiÀÄ°è «ªÀj¹gÀĪÀAvÉ gÀÆ.11,00,72,772.00 ªÀiË®åzÀ CQÌ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¨sÀvÀÛªÀ£ÀÄß ºÉÆgÀgÁdå¢AzÀ DªÀÄzÀÄ ªÀiÁrPÉÆArgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. ºÉÆgÀgÁdå¢AzÀ DªÀÄzÀÄ ªÀiÁrPÉÆAqÀ GvÀà£ÀßUÀ½UÉ ªÀiÁgÁlzÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ ªÀiÁgÁl ªÀiË®åzÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É ªÀiÁgÀÄPÀmÉÖ ±ÀĮ̪À£ÀÄß RjâzÁgÀjAzÀ ªÀ¸ÀÆ° ªÀiÁr ¸À«ÄwUÉ ¥ÁªÀw¨ÉÃPÁUÀÄvÀÛzÉ. ¨sÀvÀÛªÀ£ÀÄß ¨sÀvÀÛzÀ gÀÆ¥ÀzÀ°èAiÉÄà ªÀiÁgÁl ªÀiÁrzÀÝgÉ ¨sÀvÀÛzÀ ªÀiÁgÁl ªÀiË®åzÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É CxÀªÁ ¨sÀvÀÛªÀ£ÀÄß ¸ÀA¸ÀÌgÀuÉ ªÀiÁrzÀÝgÉ ¸ÀA¸ÀÌjvÀ GvÀà£ÀßUÀ¼ÁzÀ CQÌ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ CQÌ £ÀÄaÑ£À ªÀiÁgÁlzÀ ªÀiË®åzÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É ªÀiÁgÀÄPÀmÉÖ ±ÀĮ̪À£ÀÄß RjâzÁgÀjAzÀ ªÀ¸ÀÆ° ªÀiÁr ¸À«ÄwUÉ ¥ÁªÀw ªÀiÁqÀ¨ÉÃPÁUÀÄvÀÛzÉ. ªÉÄîÌAqÀ vÀBSÉÛAiÀÄ°è ºÉÆgÀgÁdå¢AzÀ DªÀÄzÀÄ ªÀiÁrPÉÆArgÀĪÀ 51020 QéAmÁ¯ï CQÌ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¨sÀvÀÛ GvÀà£ÀßUÀ¼À£ÀÄß AiÀiÁjUÉ ªÀiÁgÁl ªÀiÁqÀ¯ÁVzÉ JA§ §UÉÎ ªÀiÁ»wAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ºÁdgÀÄ¥Àr¸À®Ä ºÉZÀÄѪÀj ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ (PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ eÁjPÉÆñÀ) EªÀgÀÄ 09.12.2019, 02.01.2020, 14.01.2020, 12.02.2020, 25.02.2020 ¢£ÁAPÀUÀ¼ÀAzÀÄ £ÉÆÃnøï eÁj ªÀiÁqÀ¯ÁV ºÁdgÀÄ¥Àr¹gÀĪÀÅ¢®è. F PÀbÉÃj¬ÄAzÀ ¢£ÁAPÀB 20-05-2022 gÀAzÀÄ CAwªÀÄ £ÉÆÃnøï eÁj ªÀiÁqÀ¯ÁV ¤ÃªÀÅ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà ªÀiÁ»w ¤ÃrgÀĪÀÅ¢®è. PÁgÀt ¢£ÁAPÀB 03-11-2022 gÀAzÀÄ ¸À«Äw ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ «µÀAiÀÄ ¸ÀASÉå 10 gÀ°è «µÀAiÀĪÀ£ÀÄß ªÀÄAr¸À¯ÁV ¸À«ÄwAiÀÄÄ PÀ®A 83J gÀ£ÀéAiÀÄ PÀæªÀÄ vÉUÉzÀÄPÉƼÀî®Ä ¸ÀÆa¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ.” - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15545 WP No. 14358 of 2022 9. On perusal of the impugned order at Annexure-S, respondent No.3 has not considered the objections filed by the petitioner and the material document, namely, Form No.35B (Annexure-C) produced by the petitioner has also not been adverted to. The impugned order is thus passed without consideration of relevant material, which is fundamental to adjudication under the Act. Such non-consideration amounts to a violation of principles of natural justice, rendering the order unsustainable. Any quasi-judicial determination involving financial liability must reflect due application of mind to the objections and documents produced. Failure to consider the relevant material vitiates decision making process. The impugned order, therefore, suffers from procedural irregularity warranting interference. Accordingly, this Court pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is hereby allowed. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15545 WP No. 14358 of 2022 ii. The order dated 09.11.2022 (Annexure-S) issued by respondent No.3 is quashed. iii. The matter is remitted back to respondent No.3 for fresh consideration. iv. Respondent No.3 shall consider the objections of the petitioner (Annexure-N). The petitioner is at liberty to produce additional documents in support of his claim, which shall be duly considered by respondent No.3, who shall thereafter pass a reasoned order in accordance with law. v. The entire exercise shall be completed within six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Sd/- _____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA MBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45