Allowed

Shri.Sai Priya Sugars Limited v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Jul 2024WP/146128/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a writ petition filed by Sai Priya Sugars Limited challenging a Government Order and a demand notice. Quashing the challenged orders and notice, the Court directed the State to initiate proceedings under the amended Rules.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of Government Order No.WRD 272 KBN 2017 dated 28.05.2018 and demand notice dated 06.05.2019. Liberty to State to initiate proceedings under amended Rules.

Shri.Sai Priya Sugars Limited Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:9668 WP No. 146128 of 2020

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF JULY, 2024 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 146128 OF 2020 (GM-RES)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

SHRI. SAI PRIYA SUGARS LIMITED, HIPPARAGI-MAIGUR, PO. BOX NO.10, JAMAKHANDI-587301,

¶7

TQ: JAMKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT,

¶8

REP. BY ITS PUBLIC RELATION OFFICER, SHRI. HANAMANT MUTTANNA MALAPUR, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC: PUBLIC RELATION OFFICER, R/O: JAMAKHANDI-587301, TQ: JAMKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. HARISH S. MAIGUR, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES, ROOM NO.305, 3^RD FLOOR, VIKAS SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001.

¶13

REP. BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY (TECHNICAL-5).

¶14

YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR

¶15

Digitally signed byYASHAVANTNARAYANKAR Location: High Court ofKarnataka, Dharwad BenchDate: 2024.07.19 12:24:48+0530

¶16

KRISHNA BHAGYA JALA NIGAM LTD., (KBJNL) (A GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA UNDERTAKING), DAM SUB DIVISION-3, NARAYANAPUR-585219, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶17

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, DAM DIVISION, ALAMATTI-586201, TQ: BASAVANA BAGEWADI, DIST: VIJAYAPUR.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. ASHOK T. KATTIMANI, AGA FOR R1; SRI. CHETAN MUNNOLI, ADV. FOR R2 & R3)

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF

¶21

NC: 2024:KHC-D:9668 WP No. 146128 of 2020

¶22

¶23

CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION TO QUASH THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 28.05.2018 BEARING NO.WRD.272. KBN.2017, BENGALURU PASSED BY THE 1^ST RESPONDENT PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED; QUASH THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 06.05.2019 BEARING NO.KRI.BHA.JA.NI.NI/ AA.VI.AA/DB/2019-20/251 PASSED BY THE 3^RD RESPONDENT, IN SO FAR IT RELATES TO PETITIONER IS CONCERNED, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.

¶24

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

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Learned Senior Counsel, Sri.H.N.Shashidhar and the counsels on record, in all these petitions, have placed reliance on a judgment rendered in West Coast Paper Mills Ltd., v. State of Karnataka and others¹ , by Coordinate Bench of this Court which has answered the issue raised in the captioned petition. Reliance is placed on paragraphs 4 and 5 of the judgment. It would be useful for this Court to take cognizance of the said paragraphs and operative portion of the order in the judgment cited supra . Same is extracted, which reads as under:

¶27

“4. Learned Advocate General would submit that the communication was subject to the amendment to the Rules and the Rules are yet to be amended. Therefore, he would seek liberty at the hands of the Court for the State to initiate proceedings, once the amendment to

¶28

1 W.P.No.865/2020 (D.D.30.01.2023)

¶29

¶30

NC: 2024:KHC-D:9668 WP No. 146128 of 2020

¶31

the Rules i.e., Karnataka Irrigation (Levy of Water Rates) Rules, 2002 would come about and also undertake that they would not act upon this communication or the demand notices so issued against the petitioner. The submission is placed on record.

¶32

5. In the light of the said submission, the impugned notices would lose its efficacy, but as a matter of form, will be required to be obliterated, as the petitioner has sought for a direction by issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus for renewal of his water drawl agreement.

¶33

6. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

¶34

ORDER

¶35

i. The petition is allowed.

¶36

ii. The impugned Government order bearing No.WRD 272 KBN 2017 dated 29.11.2019 issued by respondent No.1, the demand letter bearing No. 2019-20/896 dated 11.12.2019 issued by respondent No.2 and the letter dated 09.01.2020 bearing No.2019-20/1026 issued by respondent No.2 stand quashed.

¶37

iii. Respondent No.1 - State shall consider the representation of the petitioner dated 30.11.2019 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶38

iv. All of which would remain subject to the amendment to the Rules i.e., Karnataka Irrigation (Levy of Water Rates) Rules, 2002. The State is at liberty to initiate proceedings against the petitioner in terms of the amended Rules in accordance with law.”

¶39

In the light of statement made by the learned Advocate General and the observation made in the judgment cited supra, where a leave was sought on behalf of State to initiate proceedings once amendment to Karnataka Irrigation (Levy of Water Rates) Rules, 2002 would come

¶40

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:9668 WP No. 146128 of 2020

¶41

about and until such amendment is brought, undertaking was given that they would not act upon the communication and consequent demand notices. In the light of statement made by learned Advocate General, the impugned Government Order No.WRD 272 KBN 2017 dated 29.11.2019 issued by respondent No.1 and consequent demand notices were quashed by the Coordinate Bench in the judgment cited supra .

¶42

In the present writ petition, the Government Order No.WRD 272 KBN 2017 dated 28.05.2018 issued by respondent No.1 and the demand notice dated 06.05.2019 issued by respondent No.3 are challenged.

¶43

At this juncture, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 and 3 has brought to the notice of this Court that the Rules are already amended and the copy of the same is placed on record.

¶44

If the Amended Rules have come into force, the respondents in terms of the liberty granted by this Court in W.P.No.865/2020 (D.D.30.01.2023) are entitled to levy tax in accordance with law. In the light of the judgment

¶45

¶46

NC: 2024:KHC-D:9668 WP No. 146128 of 2020

¶47

rendered by the co-ordinate bench on the same issue, this

¶48

court passes the following:

¶49

ORDER

¶50

i) The writ petition is allowed.

¶51

ii) The impugned Government Order No.WRD 272 KBN 2017 dated 28.05.2018 issued by respondent No.1 and the demand notice dated 06.05.2019 issued by respondent No.3, are hereby quashed.

¶52

iii) The State is at liberty to initiate proceedings against the petitioner in terms of amendment to the Rules i.e. Karnataka Irrigation (Levy of Water Rates) Rules, 2002 in accordance with law.

¶53

iv) In view of disposal of the petition, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and are disposed of accordingly.

¶54

Sd/JUDGE

¶55

YAN

Shri.Sai Priya Sugars Limited v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri.Sai Priya Sugars Limited v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mallappa S/O Doddappa Bhishtakkanavar Vs Smt.Iravva @ Annapurnavva

A.R. Jatrate S/O. Ramachandra Jatrate Vs Karnataka Industrial Areas

Vijaya Bank Vs Hubli Dharwad Municipal Corporation

Manjunath Basapa Mudaraddy Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.K.Nagaraj S/O.K.Channabasappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri.Devappa Vs the Range Forest Officer