Remanded

Banashankari Agro Industries v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC14 Dec 2023WP/107242/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed an order blacklisting the petitioner for violation of terms without a prior hearing. The court remanded the matter to the administrative authority to provide a hearing opportunity and pass orders accordingly within three months.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 11.07.2023 is set aside; petitioner shall appear before respondent No.2; respondent to hear petitioner and pass appropriate orders within three months.

Banashankari Agro Industries Vs the State… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:14661 WP No. 107242 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 107242 OF 2023 (GM-RES)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

BANASHANKARI AGRO INDUSTRIES, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SMT. SHRIDEVI W/O. ANNAPPA HALIJOLE, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. G.P. NO. 1920/1, KAROSHI VILLAGE, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591244.

¶7

…PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SRI. SRINAND A. PACHCHAPURE & SMT. PALLAVI S. PACHCHAPURE & SRI. RAJENDRA R. PATIL, ADVOCATES)

¶9

AND:

¶10

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HORTICULTURE, LAL BAG, BENGALURU-560004.

¶11

GIRIJA A BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A BYAHATTI

¶12

THE KARNATAKA STATE HORTICULTURE MISSION AGENCY, REPRESENTED BY ITS MISSION DIRECTOR & HORTICULTURE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MISSION DIRECTOR, LAL BAG, BENGALURU-560004.

¶13

THE DIVISIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, DEPARTMENT OF HORTICULTURE, BELAGAVI-590001.

¶14

THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF HORTICULTURE, DEPARTMENT OF HORTICULTURE, ZILLA PANCHAYAT, BELAGAVI-590001.

¶15

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BELAGAVI, DIST: BELAGAVI-590001.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI. PRAVEEN UPPAR, AGA)

¶18

2 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:14661 WP No. 107242 of 2023

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER BEARING NO.DHNHMONHMA/07/2023/E-1043651 DATED 11/07/2023 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 MARKED AT ANNEXURE-H.

¶20

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Aggrieved by the order dated 11.07.2023, bearing No.DH-NHMONHMA/07/2023/3-1043651 passed by respondent No.2, wherein the petitioner has been black listed, the present writ petition is filed.

¶23

The petitioner is in the business of manufacturing fabricated metal products and agricultural and forestry machineries. Respondent No.2 has empanelled the petitioner for supply and installation of poly houses and shade nets in farm lands. On the ground that the petitioner has violated the terms and conditions of the work entrusted to him, he has been black listed. The writ petition is filed challenging the said black listing on the ground that the petitioner was not heard before passing of the impugned order.

¶24

3 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:14661 WP No. 107242 of 2023

¶25

Learned AGA admits that the petitioner was not

¶26

heard before passing of the impugned order. However, he justifies that the impugned order has been passed because the petitioner had violated the terms and conditions of the work entrusted to him and that the said order is made on an enquiry.

¶27

However, it is not in dispute that the petitioner was not heard before passing of the impugned order. Hence, it is appropriate to remand the matter back to respondent No.2, to hear the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶28

Hence the following:

¶29

ORDER

¶30

i. The impugned order dated 11.07.2023, bearing No.DH-NHMONHMA/07/2023/3-1043651 passed by respondent No.2, vide Annexure H to the writ petition, is hereby set aside.

¶31

4 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:14661 WP No. 107242 of 2023

¶32

ii. Petitioner shall appear before respondent No.2 on

¶33

03.01.2024 without any further notice.

¶34

iii. Respondent No.2 shall provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thereafter pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within

¶35

a period of thee months thereafter.

¶36

iv. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶37

Sd/JUDGE

¶38

gab ct-mck List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22

Banashankari Agro Industries v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Banashankari Agro Industries v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shankrayya S/O Maharudrayya Hiremath Vs the State of Karnataka

Ganesh S/O Devendrappa Ronad Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Shri. Sudhir Guranna Halgekar Vs the Chief Executive Officer

Kumari Susmita D/O Basavaraj Ankali Vs Smt. Sugandha W/O Siddappa Shiragavi

Shri Veerabhadra Dev of Godachi Vs the State of Karnataka

Paramarth Niketan Trust Shri Hari Mandir 734 Vs State of Karnataka