- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4792 WP No. 2395 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2395 OF 2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: DR B R AMBEDKAR SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBE MINUGARARA SAHAKARA SANGHA LTD., OFFICE/AT THIRUMALAPURA, CHINAKURALI HOBLI, SANABA POST, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571455, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER SRI. DHANADAS. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NAGENDRA C S.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND FISHERIES, M.S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 2. THE DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES, 3RD FLOOR, PHODIUM BLOCK, VISHWESHWARAIAH BLOCK, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4792 WP No. 2395 of 2026 3. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, MYSURU ZONE, NO.12A, 9TH CROSS, K BLOCK, RAMAKRISHNANAGAR, DATTAGAHALLI, MYSURU - 570 022 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, MANDYA DISTRICT, MANDYA - 571 401. 5. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT, MANDYA - 571 438 6. THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, MANDYA SUB DIVISION, MANDYA - 571 401 7. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA - 571 434 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.SARITHA KULKARNI, AGA) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER BEARING NO. MINI/TECH/HAGUPA/2/156/2024 E-1518791 DTD. 17.01.2026 PASSED BY THE DIRECTORATE OF FISHERIES / R-2 BY CANCELLING THE TENDER DTD. 17.09.2024 GRANTED LEASE HOLD RIGHTS FOR - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4792 WP No. 2395 of 2026 HARVESTING OF FISH FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONERS LEASE AS PER ANNX- A DTD.17.01.2026. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioner, a Co-operative society constituted by fishermen from Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, is aggrieved by the second respondent's order dated 17.01.2026 [Annexure-A]. The second respondent, by this order, has cancelled the lease of fishing rights granted to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has subleased the leasehold rights. Sri Nagendra C S, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that this is factually incorrect and the petitioner has represented, apart from initiating - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4792 WP No. 2395 of 2026 criminal proceedings, that the petitioner's letter heads are misused by certain third parties. Crucially, the learned counsel submits that the second respondent's decision is without due opportunity to the petitioner to show cause against the decision to cancel the lease of fishing rights. Smt Saritha Kulkarni, a learned Additional Government Advocate who accepts notice for the respondents, refutes the assertion that the decision is taken without an opportunity to the petitioner relying upon the terms of the second respondent's impugned order. The learned Additional Government Advocate emphasizes that the second respondent has observed that petitioner is issued with notice dated 10.11.2025 but has not responded. It is seen from the second respondent's order that the decision to cancel the grant of fishing leasehold rights is premised in a complaint that is filed by the jurisdictional police and some inquiry - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4792 WP No. 2395 of 2026 based on such complaint. It is also possible that the second respondent has caused communication to the petitioner before taking the decision to cancel the fishing leasehold rights but given the consequences and the possible explanation that the petitioner could have as against the allegation, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned order must be read down as another show cause notice to the petitioner with a reasonable opportunity to show cause observing that the second respondent, based on the cause that could be shown by the petitioner, must take a fresh decision. In the light of the afore, the following: ORDER [a] The petition stands disposed of reading down the impugned order dated 17.01.2026 [Annexure-A] as a show cause notice to the petitioner reserving liberty to the petitioner within two weeks from today to file a response with all the documents. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4792 WP No. 2395 of 2026 [b] The second respondent is called upon to consider the same and pass a reasoned order and in any event within four weeks. It is needless to observe that when the petitioner's cause is being examined there cannot be any precipitation. SD/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE AN/-