- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5598 WP No. 1099 /2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO.1099/2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI SIDDARAJU SON OF REVANNA SIDDAIAH AGED 61 YEARS, SENIOR CITIZEN RESIDING AT NO.5793/14, BETHANAGERE ROAD, HIPPE ANJANEYASWAMY LAYOUT, NELAMANGALA, BENGALURU RURAL, KARNATAKA - 562 123 2. SMT. SAROJA S. L. WIFE OF SRI. SIDDARAJU, AGED 48 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.5793/14, BETHANAGERE ROAD, HIPPE ANJANEYASWAMY LAYOUT, NELAMANGALA, BENGALURU RURAL, KARNATAKA - 562 123. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI.PRATIK PANY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. S R ENTERPRISES, LOCATED INSIDE HIPPE ANJANEYASWAMY LAYOUT, BETTANGERE ROAD, NELAMANGALA TOWN, Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5598 WP No. 1099 /2026 BENGALURU RURAL, KARNATAKA- 562 123 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI. RAMESH KUMAR V.R. 2. KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD REGIONAL OFFICE - NELAMANGALA PEENYA REGIONAL OFFICE (RSEO BENGALURU NORTH) 1ST FLOOR, URBAN ECO PARK, 100 FT ROAD, 3RD PHASE, PEENYA INDUSTRIAL AREA, BENGALURU - 560 058. REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER 3. THE COMMISSIONER NELAMANGALA CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, B.H. ROAD, NEAR KSRTC BUS STOP NELAMANGALA, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, KARNATAKA - 562 123. REPRESENTED BY SRI. GANGADHARA …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V.F.KUMBAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-1; MS.RASHI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.A MAHESH CHOWDHARY, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI.G.NATARAJA, ADVOCATE FOR R.3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT R-1, 2 AND 3 TO CONSIDER THE CORRESPONDENCE DATED 03.07.2025 (ANNX-M) AND TO TAKE ALL NECESSARY AND EFFECTIVE STEPS TO STOP THE ILLEGAL AND UNAUTHORIZED OPERATION OF THE ARECA NUT PLATE MANUFACTURING UNIT RUN BY R-1 WITHIN A TIME-BOUND MANNER. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5598 WP No. 1099 /2026 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioners are residents of a residential area in Nelamangala, Bengaluru, and they have filed this petition for directions to the second and the third respondents to take all necessary measures to stop the first respondent from operating an industrial unit in a residential locality. The petitioners assert that their complaint is because the first respondent operates this unit which manufactures plates and other consumables from arecanut plant waste causing noise and air pollution, but no action has been taken. 2. Ms. Rashi, the learned counsel who appears on behalf of Mr. A. Mahesh Chowdhary, the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5598 WP No. 1099 /2026 learned counsel on record for the second respondent submits on instructions, that [a] the first respondent's unit would be within "White Category of Industries" and therefore, it would not come within the mechanism of issuance of consent for establishment or operation, and [b] the third respondent, acting on the petitioners' complaint, has suspended the first respondent's Trade License and all operations have ceased. 3. Mr. Pratik Pany, the learned counsel for the petitioners, without disputing these assertions, submit that [a] the operations have ceased for the present, [b] the third respondent cannot renew the first respondent's Trade License unless measures are taken in tandem with the second respondent to ensure that there is no noise pollution and there is no burning within the vicinity of either the petitioners' property or the first respondent's property resulting in air pollution, and [c] it is imperative for - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5598 WP No. 1099 /2026 the third respondent to consider whether the first respondent's unit is in a residential locality. 4. Mr. V. F. Kumbar, the learned counsel for the first respondent, submits that indeed the third respondent has suspended the Trade Licence constraining the first respondent to stop all operations and that the third respondent has also taken measures to assess noise levels and whether the first respondent is responsible for any noise pollution as claimed by the petitioner. Further, the learned counsel to answer the allegations of causing air pollution, submits that the first respondent's unit is not in the residential locality and the first respondent does not burn any waste within the premises or otherwise. 5. These submissions are considered to assess whether there must be any directions to the second and the third respondents or to the first respondent. If the third respondent has suspended - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5598 WP No. 1099 /2026 the Trade Licence and the first respondent has ceased the operations, it is inarguable that the operations cannot be recommenced until and unless the Trade License is reinstated. The second and third respondents between themselves must not only conduct all procedures as must be to assess the air and noise pollution but also to decide on whether an industrial activity can be permitted in a residential locality only because a Trade License is once issued. 6. This Court must also, to balance interests, direct the third respondent to communicate the decision on reinstatement of Trade License of the first respondent within three [3] weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. It is needless to observe that both the petitioners and the first respondent are reserved with liberty to file a certified copy of this order with the third respondent within a week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5598 WP No. 1099 /2026 The petition stands disposed of accordingly. SD/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE RB