- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30431 WP No. 9287 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 9287 OF 2022 (APMC-) BETWEEN: 1. M/S MRB AND CO A PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS OFFICE AT SITE NO.27, 7TH WARD DOOR NO.82/32, APMC YARD ONION MARKET, P B ROAD DAVANAGERE -577 002 REP BY ITS PARTNER MR MOHAMED SHAFI AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, S/O MR YUSUF SAB. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. TANISH C REDDY, COUNSEL FOR SRI. ABHINAV RAMANAND A.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE, (APMC) DAVANAERE APMC YARD, DAVANAERE -577 003 REP BY ITS SECRETARY. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. NANDA KISHORE.,ADVOCATE) THIS WP FILED PRAYING TO-QUASH THE NOTICE / ORDER DTD 10.03.2022 AT ANNEXURE-F TO THE WRIT PETITION ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT APMC TO THE PETITIONER FIRM DIRECT THE RESPONDENT APMC TO ALLOW THE PETITIONER FIRM TO CONTINUE TO TRADE IN SITE NO.5 Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30431 WP No. 9287 of 2022 AT THE APMC YARD, DAVANAGERE, UNDER THE NAME OF M/S M.R.B AND CO. WITHOUT ANY OBSTRUCTIONS AND HINDRANCES AND TO GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE OPERATION, EXECUTION AND EFFECT OF THE NOTICE DTD 10.3.2022 ISSUED / PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT APMC AT ANNEXURE-F AND PERMIT THE PETITIONER FIRM TO CONTINUE THEIR BUSINESS / TRADE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER Petitioner who was allotted Unit No.5 for the purpose of trading of onion in the onion market yard as per the license granted under the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) Act, 1966 (For short Act, 1966) is before this Court complaining he being deprived of the principles of natural justice of being heard before cancellation of the said license. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order impugned dated 10.03.2022 came to be passed during COVID-19 pandemic and there was no way petitioner could have reached to the committee justifying his case. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30431 WP No. 9287 of 2022 3. In response, counsel for the respondent-APMC submits that the order impugned is revisable under Rule 23 of the Karnataka Agricultural Procedure Marketing (Regulation of Allotment of Property in Market Yards) Rules, 2004 and therefore he submits that petitioner is at liberty to avail the said provision. 4. Heard. Perused the record. 5. This matter is pending since 2022. The primary grievance of the petitioner is that he has not been heard by the respondent-Committee before passing the impugned order by which, the allotment of shop of the petitioner has been cancelled. Perusal of the impugned order dated 10.03.2022 indicate that the petitioner was issued with the notices on 12.05.2021, 10.08.2021 and 20.01.2022. There is considerable force in submission being made by the counsel for the petitioner, in that the said notices have been issued during the COVID-19 pandemic when the restriction of movements were imposed. Petitioner in this circumstances deserves an opportunity of being heard. Though, counsel for the respondent-APMC insisted that the petitioner be directed to - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30431 WP No. 9287 of 2022 avail the revisional provision, since the original order itself is passed without affording opportunity, this Court deems it appropriate to provide an opportunity to the petitioner. 6. In that view of the matter, petition is allowed. Petitioner shall treat the impugned order dated 10.03.2022 vide Annexure-F as a notice and shall file its objection/justification within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and the respondent-committee shall pass appropriate order within 3 months thereon after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. Interim order granted by this Court is extended till disposal of the matter by the respondent –Committee as directed. SD/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RU List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48