IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA W.P.No.28611/2015 (APMC) BETWEEN :
THE BASAVANAGUDI CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., BASAVANAGUDI, BANGALROE-560 004 REP. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER (OOD) (BY SRI M.N.UMASHANKAR, ADV.) ...PETITIONER AND :
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CO-OPERATION DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001.
2. THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE MARKETING, NO.16, 2ND RAJ BHAVAN ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.
3. THE SECRETARY AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE (APMC), YESHWANTHAPURA, BANGALORE-560 022.
4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DISTRICT & ADMINISTRATOR, AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE, YESHWANTHPURA, BANGALORE-560 022. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R-1, R-2 & R-4; SRI A.C.BALARAJ, ADV. FOR R-3.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTIONL OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS OF THE PRECEEDINGS OF THE R-2 IN ORDER DATED 18.04.2013 AT ANNEXURE-A AND AFTER EXAMINING THE SAME QUASH AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 18.04.2013 AT ANNEXURE-A & ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRL.HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioner is challenging the order dated 18.4.2013 passed by the 2nd respondent at Annexure-A to the writ petition and further for a direction to the 3rd respondent to allot 50% (half portion) of the schedule site bearing No.26 of Yeshwanthpura Yard on sale-cum-lease basis as per the resolution dated 28.04.2012.
2. It is significant to note that in the earlier round of litigation in W.P.No.13316/2012 filed by the petitioner seeking, interalia, a mandamus to the 3rd respondent to allot the site in question i.e. site No.26 in the market yard of Yeshwanthapura, to the petitioner- Society, during the pendency of the petition, the 3rd respondent has passed a resolution on 28.04.2012 to allot the said site to the petitioner-Society and Anekal Taluk Agricultural Produce Marketing Co-operative Society in the ratio of 50 : 50. In view of the same, this Court disposed of the petition with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the resolution dated 28.4.2012 of the 3rd respondent in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders thereon within one month from the date of issuance of certified copy of the order. It was observed that the terms of the allotment would depend upon the order to be passed by the 2nd respondent on the 3rd respondent’s resolution, until such time all the parties were directed to maintain status-quo in respect of the possession of the site in question. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.13316/2012, the 2nd respondent passed an order dated 18.4.2013 Annexure-A to the writ petition observing that the resolution passed by the 3rd respondent during the pendency of W.P.No.13316/2012 is contrary to Rule 10 of the Regulation of Allotment of Property in Market yards Rules 2004 (‘Rules’ for short). As such, the proposal made through the resolution passed by the 3rd respondent was rejected and the approval denied. The said order dated 18.4.2013 is under challenge.
3. It is significant to note that the 2nd respondent was party to the proceedings in W.P.No.13316/2012 but not objected to the said resolution of the respondent No.3. The petitioner is fighting the litigation for the allotment of site No.26 since five decades. Hence, the petitioner accepted the said resolution in order to resolve the dispute amicably. This Court while disposing of W.P.No.13316/2012 observed the acceptance of the resolution by the petitioner. It was held that the resolution passed by the 3rd respondent to allot the site No.26 to the petitioner-Society and Anekal Taluk Agricultural Produce Marketing Co-operative Society is for the reason that both the societies are farmer-friendly Societies and both are onto the activities of catering to the requirements of the farmers’ community, the resolution is passed to divide Site No.26 into two halves and allot them to the two Societies which requires to be considered by the 2nd respondent in accordance with law.
4. Respondent No.2 rejected the proposal/resolution of the respondent No.3 for the reasons that the same was passed during the subsistence of the interim order in W.P.No.13316/2012 much against Rule 10 of the Rules. It is true that resolution dated 28.04.2012 was passed during the pendency of the W.P.No.13316/2012 particularly, when the interim order was in operation. Hence, the denial of approval by the 2nd respondent in this regard cannot be found fault with. However, considering the totality of circumstances of the case, the claim of the petitioner for allotment of half portion of site No.26 requires re- consideration by the respondents No.2 and 3. Looking at the consistent and fervent efforts made by the petitioner for allotment of site, fighting the litigation since five decades, a sympathetic approach requires to be taken by the respondents No.2 and 3 while reconsidering the plea of the petitioner.
5. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider the prayer of the petitioner to allot 50% (half portion) of the schedule site No.26 in the market yard of Yeshwanthapura in accordance with the Rules and pass a resolution thereon after hearing the parties concerned, within three months from the date of issuance of certified copy of this order. Until such time, the parties shall maintain status-quo in respect of the possession of the site in question.
Petition stands disposed of accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE ln.