Dismissed¶48

M/S Amith Agro Industries v. the Union of India

Karnataka HC3 Mar 2025WA/220/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ appeal dismissed; Karnataka High Court Act Section 4; PMKSY (Pradhan Mantri Kisan Sampada Yojana) subsidy; KIADB industrial site allotment Plot No.743/1 Harohalli 3rd Phase; networth documentation and resubmission of documents; reconsideration by respondent No.4 Ministry of Food Processing Industries; Single Judge order dated 20.01.2025 in WP No.12750/2024; amounts Rs.20 lakhs, Rs.50 lakhs, Rs.30 lakhs; leaseholder versus absolute owner; coram N.V. Anjaria CJ and M.I. Arun J.

What did the court decide?

The order of the learned Single Judge permitting the petitioner to submit the documents and requiring the authority to pass the necessary orders in accordance with law on the basis of the documents which may be submitted is eminently just, proper and legal. ¶47

M/S Amith Agro Industries Vs the Union of India — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶48

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 20.01.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP No.12750/2024, disposing of the petition with directions to the petitioner to resubmit documents and to respondent No.4 to reconsider, required modification in this writ appeal filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act. +1 more

¶27

Court's answer

¶47

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is only required to resubmit all the documents and satisfy the requirement of the Scheme showing his net worth under the Scheme; thereafter the respondent-authority is to proceed to pass appropriate orders.

¶46

Key takeaways

No interference is called for with the learned Single Judge's order; the challenge is meritless and the writ appeal is dismissed.ratio¶48

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Appeal (GM-RES) No. 220 of 2025, High Court of Karnataka, Division Bench (N.V. Anjaria, Chief Justice and M.I. Arun, Judge), oral judgment delivered on 03.03.2025 per the Chief Justice. Filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act by M/s. Amith Agro Industries, proprietor Mr. Amith N.S., seeking modification of the learned Single Judge's order dated 20.01.2025 in WP No.12750/2024. The appellant, allottee of KIADB Plot No.743/1, Harohalli Village, 3rd Phase Industrial Area, had sought subsidy under the Pradhan Mantri Kisan Sampada Yojana from respondent No.4 (Ministry of Food Processing Industries). The Central Government's stand was that the sale was not confirmed, only about Rs.20 lakhs paid was considered as the petitioner was a leaseholder and not absolute owner, whereas the appellant claimed to have paid Rs.50 lakhs to KIADB as the entire sale consideration plus Rs.30 lakhs in fixed deposit. The Single Judge had permitted the petitioner to furnish details/documents to satisfy respondent No.4 regarding networth and directed reconsideration and passing of necessary orders expeditiously. The Division Bench held the Single Judge's order eminently just, proper and legal; the petitioner was only required to resubmit documents satisfying the Scheme's networth requirement, whereafter the authority was to pass appropriate orders. No interference was called for; the challenge was found meritless and the appeal was dismissed.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:9013-DB WA No. 220 of 2025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF MARCH, 2025

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT APPEAL NO. 220 OF 2025 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

M/S. AMITH AGRO INDUSTRIES

¶9

REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.147/7 SRIRAMA ROAD, 2^ND BLOCK THYAGARAJANAGAR BANGALORE - 560 028 REPRESSED BY ITS PROPRIETOR MR. AMITH N.S. S/O. N.R.NAIK AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI N.R. NAIK, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by CHAITHRA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

THE UNION OF INDIA BY ITS SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FOOD PROCESSING INDUSTRIES PANCHSHEEL BHAWAN AUGUST KRANTI MARG KHELGAON NEW DELHI - 110 049.

¶15

THE CHAIRMAN AND ADDITIONAL SECRETARY PRADHAN MANTRI KISAN SAMPADA YOJANA (PMKSY) PANCHSHEEL BHAWAN AUGUST KRANTI MARG KHELGAON NEW DELHI - 110 049.

¶16

THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE (TC) PRADHAN MANTRI KISAN SAMPADA YOJANA (PMKSY) SCRUTINY AND EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS FROM CREATION EXPANSION FOOD PROCESSING

¶17

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:9013-DB WA No. 220 of 2025

¶19

PRESERVATION CAPACITIES (CEFPPC) PANCHSHEEL BHAWAN AUGUST KRANTI MARG KHELGAON NEW DELHI - 110 049.

¶20

THE UNDER SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FOOD PROCESSING INDUSTRIES PANCHSHEEL BHAWAN AUGUST KRANTI MARG KHELGAON NEW DELHI - 110 049.

¶21

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶22

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KIADB, KHANIJA BHAVAN 4^TH FLOOR, EAST WING RACECOURSE ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶23

THE NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR SCHEDULED CASTES 5^TH FLOOR, LOK NAYAK BHAWAN KHAN MARKET NEW DELHI - 110 003.

¶24

THE DIRECTOR, SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBE COMMISSION KARNATAKA STATE, ARAVIND BHAVAN NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶25

…RESPONDENTS

¶26

(BY SRI M.N. KUMAR, CGC FOR R1 TO R4 AND R7, SRI K.S. HARISH, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR R5)

¶27

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO MODIFY THE ORDER DATED 20.01.2025 IN WP No.12750/2024 BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE FILED BY THE APPELLANT AND CALL FOR RECORDS AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF/S DEEMS FIT AS THE CIRCUMSTANCES EXPLAINED ABOVE INCLUDING COSTS.

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:9013-DB WA No. 220 of 2025

¶29

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and

¶30

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶31

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶32

(PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA)

¶33

Heard learned advocate Mr. N.R. Naik for the appellant, who

¶34

appeared and submitted through video conferencing, learned Central Government Counsel Mr. M.N. Kumar for respondent No.1 to 4 and 7 and learned Government Advocate Mr. K.S. Harish for respondent No.5.

¶35

The challenge in this appeal was directed against the order of learned Single Judge dated 20.01.2025 whereby, learned Single Judge disposed of the petition with certain observations.

¶36

The facts to be noticed from the record are inter alia that the petitioner has been allotted an industrial site in Plot No.743/1 of Harohalli Village, 3^rd Phase Industrial Area by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB). What the petitioner wanted from respondent No.4-Authority was the subsidy under the Scheme called Pradhan Mantri Kisan Sampada Yojana.

¶37

¶38

NC: 2025:KHC:9013-DB WA No. 220 of 2025

¶39

3.1 The stand of the Central Government was inter alia that the

¶40

sale was not confirmed in favour of the petitioner, that the competent authority had considered only payment of about Rs.20 lakhs at the hands of the petitioner having regard to the concession given by the KIADB for allotment of the site and that the petitioner was not absolute owner of the property and he was only leaseholder. Therefore, whatever amount paid by the petitioner to the KIADB was taken into consideration.

¶41

3.2 As against the above, the case of the petitioner was that he had paid Rs.50 lakhs to KIADB and that the entire sale consideration was paid. It was further stated by the petitioner that he has paid Rs.30 lakhs in the fixed deposit.

¶42

After considering the rival submissions and facts of the case, learned Single Judge disposed of the petition issuing following directions as found in paragraph 6, extracted herein above,

¶43

"...the petitioner is permitted to furnish all the said details along with documents to satisfy the fourth respondent regarding the networth of the petitioner. If the petitioner were to resubmit all the documents and satisfy the requirement of the Scheme showing the networth of the petitioner as required under the Scheme, the fourth respondent shall proceed to reconsider and pass necessary orders as expeditiously as possible."

¶44

¶45

NC: 2025:KHC:9013-DB WA No. 220 of 2025

¶46

Therefore, the petitioner is only required to resubmit all the documents and satisfy the requirement of the Scheme showing his net worth under the Scheme. Thereafter, the respondent-authority is directed to proceed to pass the appropriate orders.

¶47

The order of learned Single Judge containing the above observations permitting the petitioner to submit the documents and requiring the authority to pass the necessary orders in accordance with law on the basis of the documents which may be submitted is eminently just, proper and legal.

¶48

No interference is called for. The challenge is meritless. The appeal is dismissed.

¶49

Sd/(N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶50

Sd/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

¶51

¶52

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25

M/S Amith Agro Industries v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Amith Agro Industries v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri.R. Basavarajappa Vs State of Karnataka

The High Court Legal Services Committee Vs the State of Karnataka

G Shivaramaiah Vs Sri. Ritesh Kumar Singh

Sri M H Krishnegowda Vs Sri R J Kantharaju

Sri. Lokesh. v. S. Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Naveen Das Vs the Primary Agricultural Credit Co. Operative Society Ltd.