- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34842 WP No. 30878 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 30878 OF 2018 (APMC) BETWEEN: SRI. SAI RAKSHA COLD STORAGE NO.379, M G ROAD UDAYGIRI, MYSORE-570 019 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR T.G. RANGANATH THROUGH HIS GPA HOLDER MUKRAM ULLA KHAN AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS S/O ASAD ULLA KHAN. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ADITYA S.K.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE PRESIDENT AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE, MYSORE MYSORE, NANJANAGUDU ROAD BANDIPALYA, MYSORE- 560 025. 2. THE SECRETARY AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE, MYSORE MYSORE NANJANAGUDU ROAD BANDIPALYA, MYSORE- 560 025. Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34842 WP No. 30878 of 2018 3. THE DIRECTOR AGRICULTURAL MARKETING NO.16, 2ND RAJBHAVAN ROAD P B NO.5309, BANGALORE-560 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T SWAROOP FOR C/R1 AND R2; SRI. BHOJE GOWDA KOLLER, AGA FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07.09.2017 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 SECRETARY, APMC, MYSORE IN ORDER PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34842 WP No. 30878 of 2018 ORAL ORDER 1. Petitioner is before the Court seeking following reliefs: i) A Writ of Certiorari to set aside the Order dated 07.09.2017 passed by the Respondent No.2 Secretary, APMC, Mysore in Order No.KRUUMAASA/MAIN/NIVI/1061/2017-18 produced as Annexure-A. ii) Grant such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit, in the interest of justice and equity. 2. Heard, learned counsel appearing for the parties. Perused the records. 3. Petitioner who was allotted an industrial plot measuring 87,016 square feet, in the market area for the purpose of construction of cold storage, had approached this Court on earlier occasion by filing a writ petition in W.P.No.9486/2013, as the respondent-Committee had sought to cancel the said allotment on the premise of petitioner not having deposited balance amount. This Court by Order dated 28.01.2014 allowed the said petition with the following: '' 10. Accordingly, I pass the following order. The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order Annexure-U is set aside. Petitioner is permitted to deposit the balance amount within 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, whereupon the APMC-2nd respondent shall put the petitioner in possession of the property. The petitioner shall - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34842 WP No. 30878 of 2018 thereafter submit a plan seeking approval of the competent authorities for putting up construction of Cold Storage Unit. Once the plan is sanctioned, the petitioner shall complete the construction within a period of two years from the date of communication of the sanction of the plan.'' 4. It appears, thereafter petitioner had complied to the direction, which eventually led the respondent-Committee to execute lease cum sale agreement on 27.04.2015. 5. Petitioner was required to put up the cold storage after obtaining approval of sanction plan. Petitioner had submitted the plan for approval on 17.10.2016. The respondent-Committee had declined to accord the sanction on the premise that the petitioner had delayed in complying with the terms and conditions of lease cum sale agreement. That the matter was apparently taken up by the respondent-Committee, which has passed the impugned resolution and the order dated 07.09.2017, in terms of which a sum of Rs.1,04,41,920/- paid by the petitioner towards the cost of the plot, has been forfeited and allotment has been cancelled. 6. As seen at Annexure-F, that even before execution of lease cum sale agreement, by communication dated 16.06.2014 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34842 WP No. 30878 of 2018 petitioner had brought to the notice of the respondent- Committee about high tension wire running through the plot which was allotted to him causing hindrance for construction of a cold storage towers and for its efficient functioning and had also requested for removal/shifting of the said high tension wire, enabling the petitioner to proceed with the registration of lease cum sale agreement. That in response to the said communication dated 16.06.2014, respondent-Committee had taken up the matter for its discussion on 30.06.2016 and pursuant to the discussion, the Director of respondent-APMC had called for report from the Executive Engineer of the Marketing Department who had submitted the report along with key plan, suggesting that the cold storage could be constructed in two phases in the light of high tension wire which is running through the plot allotted to the petitioner. 7. Things should thus, there appears to be a change in the Committee of the respondent-APMC as seen at communication dated 04.03.2017 produced by the respondent at Annexure-R23 and matter was again taken up by the new committee and in its proceeding dated - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34842 WP No. 30878 of 2018 30.05.2017 produced at Annexure-R24, which reads as under: '' ಸೆಯ ಈ ಬೆ ಕೂಲಂಕುಷಾ ಪೕ : ಾರತ !ೋ"# ೊ$ೕ%ೇ& ಇವರು ೕತಲಗೃಹ ,-ಾ.ಣ ಉ1ೆ2ೕಶ!ಾ4 -ಾರುಕ5ೆ$ 6ಾ7ಂಗಣದ ಹಂ9!ೆ:ಾರುವ 87019 ಚದರ< ,ೇಶನದ ೕತಲಗೃಹ ,%ಾಸ>? ಕಟ$ಡ ,B.ಸಲು ನ!ಾCೆಯನು ಅನುEೕದFೆಾ ಸಸ1ೇ GFಾ!ಾರಣ !ಾಲಹರಣ -ಾಡುHಾ? Hೋ -ಾನI ಉಚJ FಾI:ಾಲಯದ ಆ1ೇಶವನು ಉಲಂಘFೆ -ಾ<ರುವMದಂದ Nಾಗೂ ಸBOPಂQೆ -ಾ<!ೊಂಡ ೕR-ಕಂ-ೇ" ಕ%ಾನ ಷರತು?ಗಳನು ಉಲಂTರುವMದಂದ ಉಚJ FಾI:ಾಲಯದ ವ>ೕಲ%ಾದ U.ಸVರೂW ಇವರ !ಾನೂನು ಸಲNೆಯಂHೆ ಸದಯವೆ ಹಂ9!ೆ -ಾ<ರುವ 87018 ಚದರ< ,ೇಶನದ ಹಂ9!ೆ ಆ1ೇಶವನು ರದು2ಪ< ಸದಯವರು 6ಾವOರುವ ,ೇಶನದ Eತ? ರೂ.1,04,41,920ಗಳನು Nಾಗೂ ,ೇಶನವನು ಸBOೆ ಮುಟು$ೋಲು Nಾ>!ೊಳYಲು ಸೆಯು Oೕ-ಾ., ಸZಮ 6ಾ7[!ಾರQಂದ ಮಂಜೂ%ಾO ಪ]ೆಯಲು ಸಾ.ನುಮತQಂದ ಒ_` Oೕ-ಾ.,ದನVಯ ಈ ಕaೇ ಪತ7 ಸಂ. ಕೃಉ-ಾಸ(ೖ)/,G/3955/2015-18, Q: 27-01-2018 ರ ,1ೇ.ಶಕರು, ಕೃ.-ಾ.ಇ., cೆಂಗಳdರು ಇವೆ ಪ7ಾ?ವFೆ ಸದು2, ಈ ಪ7ಾ?ವFೆ ಸಂಬಂಧ Q: 28-08-2018ರ !ೇಂದ7 ಕaೇ ಪತ7ದ ಸೂಚFೆಯನುಾರ ಸದ Gಷಯ ಸಂಬಂಧ ಚ9.ಸುವ ಸಲುಾ Q: 30-06-2015ರಂದು !ೇಂದ7 ಕaೇೆ Nಾಜ%ಾ ಚ9.ಸfಾರುತ?1ೆ. : ಾರZ !ೋ"# ೊ$ೕ%ೇ& ಇವರು Q: 17-10-2016ರಂದು ಸBOೆ ಮನG ಪತ7 ಸ ತಮೆ ಹಂ9!ೆ:ಾರುವ ,ೇಶನದ ಮಧIಾಗದ Nೈ5ೆನ g GದುIh ಾಹಕವM Nಾದು NೋರುವMದಂದ ಅದನು 6 Oಂಗiೆdಳೆ ಸjiಾಂತಸುವಂHೆ ,ೇಶನದ HಾವM 2 ಹಂತದ ಕಟ$ಡ ,B.ಸಲು ಅನುEೕದFೆ ,ೕಡುವಂHೆ ನkೆPಂQೆ ಏನಂO!ೊಂ<ರುHಾ?%ೆ Nಾಗೂ Q: 28-07-2010ರ !ೇಂದ7 ಕaೇ ಪತ7ದ ಸದ Gಷಯದ ಬೆ ಜಂU ತ,mೆ -ಾ< ಾಸ?ಾಂಶದ ಬೆ ತZಣ ವರQ ,ೕಡುವಂHೆ !ಾಯ.,ಾ.ಹಕ ಅnಯಂತರರು, -ಾ..Pೕ., ೖಸೂರು Nಾಗೂ !ಾಯ.ದ.ಯವೆ Ooದು2, ಅದರನVಯ ,ೇಶನದ ಸjಳ!ೆ4 ೇU ,ೕ< ಜಂU ತ,mೆ -ಾ< : ಾರZ !ೋ"# ೊ$ೕ%ೇ& ಇವರ Q: 17-10-2018ರ ಮನG ಪತ7ದ !ೋಲರುವಂHೆ ,ೇಶನದ ಮಧI ಾಗದ Nೈ5ೆನ g GದುIh ಾಹಕವM Nಾದು NೋರುವMದಂದ pೇR-1 ಮತು? 6ೇR-2 ಹಂತಗಳ PೕಜFೆಯನು ಅನುqಾrನೊoಸಲು ಅನುಮO ,ೕಡಬಹು1ೆಂಬ ಅn6ಾ7ಯ1ೊಂQೆ Q: 25-11-2018 ರಂದು !ೇಂದ7 ಕaೇೆ ವರQ ,ೕಡfಾರುತ?1ೆ. ಸದ ವರQಯನು ಪೕ Q: 04- - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34842 WP No. 30878 of 2018 03-207ರ !ೇಂದ7 ಕaೇ ಪತ7ದ ಸದ Gಷಯವನು Nೊಸ1ಾ ರಚFೆ:ಾರುವ ಸBO ಮುಂ1ೆ ಮಂ< ಸ`ಷ$ ಅn6ಾ7ಯ1ೊಂQೆ ಮರುಪೕ ಪ7ಾ?ವFೆ ಸಸಲು !ೇಂದ7 ಕaೇ ಪತ7ದ ಸೂ9ರುವMದನು !ಾಯ.ದ.ಯವರು ಸೆೆ Gವದರು. ೕಲ4ಂಡ ಎfಾ ಅಂಶಗಳನೂ ಕೂಲಂಕಷಾ ಪೕದ ಸೆಯು : ಾರZ !ೋ"# ೊ$ೕ%ೇ& ಅವರು ಹಂ9!ೆ:ಾರುವ ,ೇಶನದ ಉ1ೆ2ೕತ PೕಜFೆಯನು 6ಾ7ರಂnಸ1ೆ GFಾ!ಾರಣ ಪತ7 ಬ%ೆಯುHಾ? !ಾಲಹರಣ -ಾಡುHಾ?, -ಾನI %ಾಜI ಉಚJ FಾI:ಾಲಯದ ಆ1ೇಶ Nಾಗೂ ಸBOPಂQೆ -ಾ<!ೊಂ<ರುವ !ೇR-ಕಂ-ೇ" ಕ%ಾನ ಷರತು?ಗಳನು ಉಲಂTರುವMದಂದ Q: 06-01-2016ರ ಸBO ಸೆಯ Gಷಯ ಸಂmೆI (28) ರ !ೈೊಂ<ರುವ Oೕ-ಾ.ನದಂHೆ ಸದಯವೆ ಹಂ9!ೆ -ಾ<ರುವ 87016 ಚದರ< ,ೇಶನದ ಹಂ9!ೆ ಆ1ೇಶವನು ರದು2ಪ< ಸದಯವರು 6ಾವOರುವ ,ೇಶನದ Eತ? ರೂ.1,04,41,920ಗಳನು Nಾಗೂ ,ೇಶನವನು ಸBOೆ ಮುಟು$ೋಲು Nಾ>!ೊಳYಲು ಸೆಯ ಮHೊ?t ಸಾ.ನುಮತQಂದ ಒ_` -ಾನI ,1ೇ.ಶಕರು, ಕೃ.-ಾ.ಇ., cೆಂಗಳdರು ಇವಂದ ಮಂಜೂ%ಾO ಪ]ೆಯಲು Oೕ-ಾ.,ಸfಾತು.'' 8. Perusal of the said document indicate that upto page-5 of the said proceedings, the incidents that transpired between the petitioner and the respondent-Committee has been narrated by the Secretary of the Committee and in the last paragraph of page No.5. Without adverting to the issue raised by the petitioner regarding high tension wire running through the plot and without even adverting to the report submitted by the Executive Engineer, which was summoned by the Director of the respondent-APMC, the respondent-Committee seemed to have rejected the case of the petitioner only on the sole premise of petitioner - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34842 WP No. 30878 of 2018 purportedly wasting their time. This resolution has led to the issuance of impugned order. 9. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, there has been no deliberation, discussion or any order passed by the respondent-Committee on the issue of high tension wire running through the plot on consideration of the suggestions made by none other than the Executive Engineer of the Marketing Committee with regard to possibility of construction of cold storage in two phases. 10. There is also no reference with regard to acceptance and rejection of the said report, let alone according sanction of plan to the petitioner. Clause-3 lease-cum-sale agreement, read as under: ''3. The allottee shall apply as early as possible within 30 days from the date of this agreement to A.P.M.C. Mysore to obtain sanctioned plan and license for construction of the building on the land, and shall complete the construction within one year from the date of agreement or within the period extended by the committee or as per the High Court Order passed in writ petition No.9486/2013, the construction of cold storage buildings should be completed within two years from the date of the sanctioned plan by the committee. '' - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34842 WP No. 30878 of 2018 11. The aforesaid condition of the lease-cum-sale agreement read in the light of facts narrated above, requires the respondent-Committee to have either accorded the approval to the plan or rejected the same. That has not taken place. They cannot therefore in one stroke come to the conclusion as done in the proceedings dated 30.05.2017 produced at Annexure-R24 to hold petitioner is wasting the time. 12. Since the proceedings dated 30.05.2017 have not adverted to the undisputed facts of existence of high-tension wire, which was taken note of by the earlier respondent- committee, resulting in earlier respondent-Committee seeking intervention of the Director, who in turn had called for the report from the Executive Engineer and Executive Engineer opining possibility of construction of two phase of cold storage not having been considered, the proceedings and the consequent order has to be quashed. 13. At this juncture, learned counsel for the respondent-APMC submits that allotment of plot to the petitioner has been - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34842 WP No. 30878 of 2018 cancelled and Marketing Committee and is intending to take up construction work of market yard. 14. Accordingly, following: ORDER (i) Petition is allowed. (ii) Proceeding dated 30.05.2017 to the extent of petitioner as per Annexure-W and Impugned Order dated 07.09.2017 as per Annexure-A passed by the respondent-APMC, are hereby quashed. (iii) Matter is remitted to the respondent-Committee, who shall consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate order within an outer limit of 90 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. (iv) Needless to state, the cancellation allotment being made during the pendency of the petition shall not affect the consideration of the case of the petitioner. (v) No precipitative action shall be taken until consideration of the case of the petitioner. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RL/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21