M/S Jdv Holdings Private Limited Vs State of Karnataka

M/S. JDV HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED NO.105, FIRST FLOOR, EMBASSY SQUARE 148, INFANTRY ROAD BENGALURU – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE MR. LAVANYA JAYADEV S/O HANUMAPPA M., AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.

¶10

... PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI PRABHULING K.NAVADGI, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W., MS. SANJEEVINI P.NAVADGI, ADVOCATE)

¶12

2

¶13

AND:

¶14

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRICNIPAL SECRETARY COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶15

2 . THE COMMISSIONER FOR INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE 2^ND FLOOR, SOUTH WING, KHANIJA BHAVAN RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶16

3 . KARNATAKA UDYOG MITRA REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 3^RD FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVAN (SOUTH WING) NO.49, RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶17

4 . KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS

¶18

DEVELOPMENT BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER, NO.5 FOURTH FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVAN RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶19

... RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R1;

¶21

SMT. SUKRUTHA R., ADVOCATE FOR R3; R2 – SERVED

¶22

SRI K.SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL A/W., SRI B.B.PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND

¶24

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE

¶25

3

¶26

R-4 TO ISSUE THE LETTER OF ALLOTMENT FOR 15 ACRES OF LAND IN CHIKKAHALLUR VILLAGE, HOSKOTE TALUK BENGLAURU RURAL DISTRICT UNDER THE KIADB SINGLE UNIT COMPLEX IN A TIME BOUND MANNER AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW; DIRECT TH R-4 TO FIX THE PRICE PER ACRE AT THE SAME RATE AS FIXED FOR PM INFRASTRUCTURE LTD AS BOTH THE LANDS ARE CONTIGUOUS.

¶27

IN WRIT PETITION No.11660 OF 2021

¶28

BETWEEN:

¶29

MYSORE LOGISTICS PVT. LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR. SATISH P.CHANDRA 11, GROUND FLOOR, “GLOBAL TECH PARK.” O’SHAUGHNESSY ROAD LANGFORD TOWN, BENGALURU – 560 025.

¶30

... PETITIONER

¶31

(BY SRI AJESH KUMAR S., ADVOCATE)

¶32

AND:

¶33

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶34

2 . THE COMMISSIONER FOR INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE 2^ND FLOOR, SOUTH WING, KHANIJA BHAVAN

¶35

4

¶36

RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶37

3 . KARNATAKA UDYOG MITRA REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 3^RD FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVAN (SOUTH WING), NO.49 RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶38

4 . KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD (KIADB) REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER, NO.5, FOURTH FLOOR KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶39

... RESPONDENTS

¶40

(BY SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R1 AND R2; SMT. SUKRUTHA R., ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI K.SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL A/W., SRI B.B.PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

¶41

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-4 TO ISSUE THE LETTER OF ALLOTMENT FOR 50 ACRES OF LAND AT SY.NO.25 IN CHIKKAHALLUR VILLAGE, HOSKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT UNDER THE KIADB SINGLE UNIT COMPLEX IN A TIME-BOUND MANNER AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AS PER THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DTD 24.07.2019 VIDE ANNX-B; DIRECT THE R-4 TO FIX THE PRICE PER ACRE AT THE RATE OF RS.80 LAKHS (EIGHTY LAKHS ONLY) BEING SIMILAR TO SIMILARLY PLACED PERSONS, AS BOTH THE LANDS ARE

¶42

5

¶43

CONTIGUOUS.

¶44

IN WRIT PETITION No.16402 OF 2021

¶45

BETWEEN:

¶46

M/S. ZEALTEC ENERGY LIMITED A PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING REGISTERED ADDRESS AT NO. 52/44, 8^TH MAIN, 2^ND CROSS GANESH BLOCK, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT BENGALURU - 560 086 THORUGH ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. ALEX PUTHENCHIRA JOHNSON.

¶47

... PETITIONER

¶48

(BY SRI DEEPAK BHASKAR, ADVOCATE)

¶49

AND:

¶50

1 . THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD A STATUTORY BODY CONSTITUTED UNDER SECTION 5 OF THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT ACT, 1966 HAVING REGISTRED OFFICE AT NO. 5 4^TH FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVAN RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU – 560 001 THROUGH ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.

¶51

2 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

¶52

6

¶53

COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶54

3 . THE COMMISSIONER FOR INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE HAVING OFFICE AT 2^ND FLOOR SOUTH WING, KHANIJA BHAVAN RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶55

4 . KARNATAKA UDYOG MITHRA REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR 3^RD FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVAN (SOUTH WING) NO.49, RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶56

... RESPONDENTS

¶57

(BY SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R2; SMT. SUKRUTHA R., ADVOCATE FOR R4; SRI SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE GENERAL A/W., SRI B.B.PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R3)

¶58

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 TO ISSUE AN ALLOTMENT LETTER AND EXECUTE A SALE DEED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER HEREIN ABOVE IN FURTHERANCE OF THE MEETING OF THE STATE LEVEL SINGLE WINDOW CLEARANCE COMMITTEE ON 15.06.2019 VIDE ANNX-B AND THE GOVERNMENT ORDER BEARING NO. CI 73 SPI 2019 AS PASSED ON 24.07.2019 VIDE ANNX-C WHEREBY IT WAS ORDERED THAT THE PETITIONER BE ALLOTTED 40 ACRES OF LAND IN CHIKKAHALLUR VILLAGE, HOSKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

¶59

7

¶60

THESE WRIT PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 24.09.2025, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

¶61

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶62

CAV ORDER

¶63

The petitioners in all these cases seek a direction by issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the 4^th respondent/ Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Board’ for short) to issue letters of allotment for different measurements of land for setting up industries.

¶64

Since the issue in the lis is common, as noted hereinabove, though the petitioners are different, the matters are taken up together and considered by this common order.

¶65

Heard Sri Prabhuling K. Navadgi, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.7218 of 2021; Sri Ajesh Kumar S., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.11660 of 2021; Sri Deepak Bhaskar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.16402 of 2021; Sri Spoorthy

¶66

8

¶67

Hegde, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 in W.P.No.7218 of 2021 and W.P.No.11660 of 2021 and for respondent No.2 in W.P.No.16402 of 2021; Smt. Sukrutha R., leaned counsel for respondent No.3 in W.P.No.7218 of 2021 and W.P.No.11660 of 2021 and for respondent No.4 in W.P.No.16402 of 2021 and Sri K.Shashikiran Shetty, learned Advocate General along with Sri B.B.Patil, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 in W.P.No.7218 of 2021 and W.P.No.11660 of 2021 and for respondent Nos.1 and 3 in W.P.No.16402 of 2021.

¶68

Facts, in brief, germane are as follows: -

¶69

Writ Petition No.7218 of 2021:

¶70

4.1 The petitioner in the subject petition is a private limited entity, incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013. The petitioner intending to establish a unit for pre-cast slab warehousing in 15 acres of land in Chikkahallur Village, Hoskote Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District with a proposed investment of ₹72/crores for the said project and for generation of employment of nearly 335 persons, applies to the 3^rd respondent, the Single

¶71

9

¶72

Window Clearance Committee (‘the Committee’ for short) for approval of allotment of land. The application is submitted on 08-05-2019. The petitioner is said to have applied under the Board’s Single Unit Complex category. The project proposal is said to have been examined in the proceedings of 116^th meeting of the Committee held on 15-06-2019. After clearance by the Committee, the petitioner submits certain representations before the 63^rd Land Audit Committee regarding its proposed project and requested allotment of 20 acres of land to carry out the business in the said village. The averment in the petition is that, the petitioner was informed by the 4^th respondent that the proposed land was situated in an area that was already allotted to another entity viz. , M/s P.M.Infrastructure Private Limited. The further averment in the petition is that M/s P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited had filed Writ Petition No.47952 of 2015 seeking a direction to allot 163 acres of land to carry out its project in which there is an interim order dated 07-11-2015 directing the respondents not to consider applications of other parties for the said area. The 4^th respondent is said to have informed the petitioner that M/s P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited has submitted an application online, wherein it had varied its

¶73

10

¶74

request from 163 acres to 50 acres. Therefore, the petitioner has reason to believe that 113 acres is available for allotment. Representations then were submitted again and all the applications of the petitioner were dependent upon M/s P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited’s case before this Court in the aforesaid petition. Since the said petition was also pending and no decision was taken qua 113 acres, which according to the petitioner M/s P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited had given up, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction by issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus . Therefore, it is not a case where the petitioner has at any time been allotted any land, but it is wanting allotment.

¶75

Writ Petition No.11660 OF 2021 :

¶76

4.2 The petitioner in the subject petition is a private limited company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013. The petitioner intending to establish a unit for manufacture of Warehousing Logistics applies to the 3^rd respondent seeking allotment of 75 acres of land in Sy.No.25 of Chikkahallur Village, Hoskote Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District. The proposed investment

¶77

11

¶78

was about ₹350/- crores and the potential projected for employment was more than few thousands. The application is said to have been placed before the 3^rd respondent/Committee for approval on 09.10.2018 and the Committee in terms of its proceedings dated 15-06-2019, accord in-principle approval of the proposal of the petitioner. The allotment did not come about again for the reason that the land that was allotted to this petitioner by the Committee was already allotted to M/s P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited and M/s. P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited had preferred a writ petition in W.P.No.47952 of 2015. Therefore, the fate of allotment to this petitioner also became dependent upon the allotment made to M/s. P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited. The other narration of about M/s. P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited is identical to what is narrated in the aforesaid petition. Therefore, it would not require any reiteration.

¶79

Writ Petition No.16402 of 2021:

¶80

4.3 The petitioner in this case is a company registered under

¶81

the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. This petitioner also desirous of establishing a Warehouse and Logistics Unit applies for

¶82

12

¶83

allotment of 40 acres of land in the same village as is applied by the afore-mentioned two petitioners. The petitioner’s proposal was also cleared by the Committee on the same day i.e., on 15-06-2019. The petitioner not being aware of what has happened to its application has approached this Court seeking a direction by issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to implement the Clearance Committee recommendations.

¶84

One stream that flows through all these petitions is that, the applications of the petitioners are only cleared by the Committee but there is no allotment made by the 4^th respondent/Board pursuant to the clearance by the Committee. Yet another common stream that runs through these petitions is that, the right of these petitioners is dependent upon the right of M/s.P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited.

¶85

The respective learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, though different, would in unison submit that the applications of these petitioners ought to be taken to their logical conclusion, more so, in the light of the fact that all the applications have merited positive consideration at the hands of the Committee

¶86

13

¶87

and once that is done, the Board has no option but to allot in the manner in which the Committee has considered the applications. All the learned counsel would submit that M/s P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited had sought 163 acres that was allotted. It was wanting it to be allotted as a single unit complex. Dispute arose. M/s P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited is before this Court in W.P.No.47952/2015. During the subsistence of the petition, M/s.P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited has reduced its demand from 163 acres to 50 acres. Therefore, the petitioners’ applications must merit consideration as it would come within 113 acres that is left over by M/s P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited.

¶88

Per contra , Sri K.Shashikiran Shetty, learned Advocate General appearing for respondent No.4 along with Sri B.B.Patil, learned counsel would vehemently refute the contentions and submit that the right of the petitioners is still inchoate. Their applications have been recommended but the recommendation has still remained as a recommendation and insofar as M/s P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited is concerned, learned Advocate General submits that the petition filed by it has been dismissed by

¶89

14

¶90

this Court against which a writ appeal is preferred, which is pending consideration before the Division Bench. The learned Advocate General submits that if M/s P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited does not have any right, the petitioners’, whose applications are only considered, cannot have a superior right and, therefore, the petitioners are before the Court seeking a direction by issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus for allotment.

¶91

I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material on record.

¶92

The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. They are a matter of record. In Writ Petition No.7218 of 2021 approval is granted by the Committee and an order is passed by the Committee. The order reads as follows:

¶93

“Sub: Approval to the proposal of M/s JDV holdings Pvt Ltd to establish a unit for "Precast Slab, Warehousing" in Chikkahullur Village, Hoskote Taluk, Bangalore Rural District.

¶94

Read: Proceedings of 116^th meeting of State Level Single Window Clearance Committee (SLSWCC) held on 15.6.2019

15

****

Preamble:

M/s JDV holdings Pvt Ltd has proposed to establish a unit for “Precast Slab, Warehousing" with an investment of Rs.72.00 crore and generating employment to about 335 persons in Chikkahullur Village, Hoskote Taluk, Bangalore Rural District.

¶99

The proposal was examined in the 116^th meeting of State Level Single Window Clearance Committee (SLSWCC) of the Government held on 15.6.2019 and based on the decision of the committee the following order is issued.

¶100

OFFICE ORDER

¶101

ORDER NO: I&C/ID/SLSWCC-116/E3/2019-20, BENGALURU; Date: 20.6.2019

¶102

Government is pleased to accord approval to the investment proposal of M/s JDV holdings Pvt Ltd to establish a unit for "Precast Slab, Warehousing" in Chikkahullur Village, Hoskote Taluk, Bangalore Rural District, with an investment of Rs.72.00 crore and generating employment to about 335 persons with the following infrastructure assistance, incentives and concessions:

¶103

Sanction of the above infrastructure facilities, incentives and concessions is subject to the following terms and conditions:

¶104

16

¶105

1. Environment : The company to obtain Consent for Establishment and Consent for Operation from KSPCB and environmental clearance from MoEF, Govt. of India or the Dept of Forest, Ecology & Environment, Govt. of Karnataka, as applicable.

¶106

2. Employment : The company shall comply with the employment provisions of the respective Policy of Govt. of Karnataka, and prepare a plan for development of Human Resources required for the project and also train local people. A copy of Human Resources Development plan shall be sent to the Commissioner for Industrial Development & Director of Industries and Commerce for monitoring.

¶107

3. Vendor Development : Wherever there is scope for vendor development for the project, the company shall prepare a vendor development plan, develop local vendors and procure the required inputs, components and sub-assemblies from these local vendor units. A copy of the vendor development plan shall be sent to the Commissioner for Industrial Development & Director of Industries and Commerce for monitoring.

¶108

4. Social Infrastructure Development : The company is advised to take up social infrastructure development projects in the vicinity of the proposed location of the unit and comply with the stipulation of Companies Act, 2013. A copy of such projects shall be sent to the Commissioner for Industrial Development & Director of Industries and Commerce for monitoring.

¶109

5. Others :

¶110

a) The company shall adopt rainwater harvesting, waste water recycling and water conservation techniques. Zero discharge facility should be adopted wherever applicable.

¶111

b) The company shall take all statutory and other necessary clearances from the competent authorities including Govt. of India.

¶112

17

¶113

c) As part of "Ease of Doing Business" Government vide order No. CI 89 SPI 2013, Bengaluru Dated 20.12.2014 has accorded approval to operationalise e-Udyami Phase II for obtaining various clearances / approvals / licenses etc. through common e-platform for the projects approved through District Level Single Window Clearance Committee (DLSWCC) or State Level Single Window Clearance Committee (SLSWCC) or State High Level Clearance Committee (SHLCC) w.e.f. 01.01.2015.

¶114

d) The approvals / NOCs of following Departments have been covered under Phase II of e-Udyami.

¶115

i. Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board.

¶116

ii. Karnataka Small Scale Industries Development Corporation.

¶117

iii. Karnataka State Pollution Control Board. iv. Factories, Boilers, Industrial Safety and Health Department

¶118

v. Industries and Commerce Department vi. Town Planning Department and Local Planning Authorities

¶119

vii. Municipal Administration Department viii. BESCOM/GESCOM/HESCOM/CESCOM/ MESCOM

¶120

ix. Karnataka State Fire and Emergency Services Department

¶121

x. Water Resources Department

¶122

e) The login and passwords which are used for filing application through e-Udyami Phase I are also applicable for filing application through e-Udyami Phase II. E-Udyami Phase II web application may be accessed through www.ebizkarnataka.gov.in and online application along with necessary documents may please be filed for any of above Departments' approval/ NOCs.

¶123

18

¶124

f) Karnataka Udyog Mitra (KUM) would provide the necessary escort services for the speedy implementation of your project. You are requested to inform the progress made in the implementation of the project every quarter in the proforma.

¶125

This approval is valid for a period of two years from the date of issue of this order.

¶126

On behalf of Govt. of Karnataka

¶127

Sd/-

¶128

(Gunjan Krishna, IAS) Commissioner for Large and Mega Industries and Member Secretary, State Level Single Window Clearance Committee.”

¶129

(Emphasis added)

¶130

The approval was valid for two years from the date of issuance of the order. The date of issuance of the order is 20-06-2019; not two but 6 years have passed by. The approval has not fructified into an allotment at the hands of the Board. The approval remains an approval even as on date.

¶131

In Writ Petition No.11660 of 2021, it is a similar scenario. The Government Order is issued on 24-07-2019 according inprinciple approval for establishment of the industry. The Government order reads as follows:

¶132

19

¶133

“ GOVERNMENT ORDER No. CI 72 SPI 2019, BENGALURU, DATED: 24.07.2019

¶134

Government is pleased to accord in-principle approval to the investment proposal of M/s Mysore Logistics Pvt. Ltd to establish a unit for Manufacture of "Warehousing Logistics" with investment of Rs. 350.00 crores, generating employment to about 4600 persons at Chikkahullur Village, Hoskote Taluk, Bangalore Rural District with the following infrastructure assistances, incentives and concessions:

¶135

Sanction of the above infrastructure assistances, incentives and concessions is subject to the following terms and conditions:

¶136

1. Environment : The company to obtain Consent for Establishment and Consent for Operation from KSPCB and environmental clearance from MoEF, Govt. of India or the Dept of Forest, Ecology & Environment, Govt. of Karnataka, if applicable.

¶137

2. Employment : The Company shall comply with the provisions of Industrial Policy of the State of Govt. of Karnataka with respect to local employment on the project. Prepare a plan for development of Human Resources required for the project, train local people. A copy of Human Resources Development plan shall be sent to the

¶138

20

¶139

Commissioner for Industrial Development & Director of Industries and Commerce for monitoring.

¶140

3. Vendor Development : Wherever there is scope for vendor development for the project, the company shall prepare a vendor development plan, develop local vendors and procure the required inputs, components and subassemblies from these local vendor units. A copy of the vendor development plan shall be sent to the Commissioner for Industrial Development & Director of Industries and Commerce for monitoring.

¶141

4. Social Infrastructure Development : The Company is advised to take up social infrastructure development projects in the vicinity of the proposed location of the unit and comply with the stipulation of Company Act 2013. A copy of such projects shall be sent to the Commissioner for Industrial Development & Director of industries and Commerce for monitoring.

¶142

5. Others :

¶143

a. The company shall adopt rainwater harvesting, waste water recycling and water conservation techniques. Zero discharge facility should be adopted wherever applicable.

¶144

b. The company shall take all statutory and other necessary clearances from the competent authorities including Govt. of India.

¶145

c. As part of "Ease of Doing Business" Government vide order No. CI 89 SPI 2013, Dated: 20.12.2014 has accorded approval to operationalise e-Udyami Phase II for obtaining various clearances / approvals/licenses etc. through common e-platform for the projects approved through District Level Single Window Clearance Committee (DLSWCC) or State Level Single Window Clearance Committee (SLSWCC) or State High Level Clearance Committee (SHLCC) w.e.f. 01.01.2015.

¶146

21

¶147

d. The approvals / NOCs of following Departments have been covered under Phase II of e-Udyami. i. Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board.

¶148

ii. Karnataka Small Scale Industries Development Corporation.

¶149

iii. Karnataka State Pollution Control Board. iv. Factories, Boilers, Industrial Safety and Health Department

¶150

v. Industries and Commerce Department vi. Town Planning Department and Local Planning Authorities

¶151

vii. Municipal Administration Department viii. BESCOM/GESCOM/HESCOM/CESCOM/ MESCOM

¶152

ix. Karnataka State Fire and Emergency Services Department

¶153

x. Water Resources Department

¶154

e. The login and passwords which are used for filing application through e-Udyami Phase I are also applicable for filing application through e-Udyami Phase II. E-Udyami Phase II web application may be accessed through www.ebizkarnataka.gov.in and online application along with necessary documents may please be filed for any of above Departments' approval/NOCs.

¶155

f. Karnataka Udyog Mitra (KUM) would provide the necessary escort services for the speedy implementation of your project. You are requested to inform the progress made in the implementation of the project every quarter in the proforma.

¶156

22

¶157

This approval is valid for a period of two years from the date of issue of this Government Order.

¶158

By Order and in the name of the Governor of Karnataka,

¶159

Sd/24/7/19. (NAGARATHNAMMA.G) Desk Officer (Technical Cell). Commerce & Industries Department.”

¶160

(Emphasis added)

¶161

Here again the approval by the Committee was for a period of two years and six years have passed by.

¶162

In Writ Petition No.16402 of 2021, the application of the petitioner is processed and an order is passed on the same day i.e., 24-07-2019 and the accord in-principle approval is to be for a period of two years. The Government order reads as follows:

¶163

“ GOVERNMENT ORDER No. CI 73 SPI 2019, BENGALURU, DATED: 24.07.2019

¶164

Government is pleased to accord in-principle approval to the investment proposal of M/s Zealtech Energy Ltd. Ltd to establish a unit for Manufacture of "Warehouse and Logistics" with investment of Rs. 193.45 crores, generating employment to about 1600 persons at Chikkahullur Village, Hoskote Taluk, Bangalore Rural District with the following infrastructure assistances, incentives and concessions:

¶165

23

¶166

Sanction of the above infrastructure assistances, incentives and concessions is subject to the following terms and conditions:

¶167

1. Environment : The company to obtain Consent for Establishment and Consent for Operation from KSPCB and environmental clearance from MoEF, Govt. of India or the Dept of Forest, Ecology & Environment, Govt. of Karnataka, if applicable.

¶168

2. Employment : The Company shall comply with the provisions of Industrial Policy of the State of Govt. of Karnataka with respect to local employment on the project. Prepare a plan for development of Human Resources required for the project, train local people. A copy of Human Resources Development plan shall be sent to the Commissioner for Industrial Development & Director of Industries and Commerce for monitoring.

¶169

3. Vendor Development : Wherever there is scope for vendor development for the project, the company shall prepare a vendor development plan, develop local vendors and procure the required inputs, components and subassemblies from these local vendor units. A copy of the vendor development plan shall be sent to the Commissioner for Industrial Development & Director of Industries and Commerce for monitoring.

¶170

4. Social Infrastructure Development : The Company is advised to take up social infrastructure

¶171

24

¶172

development projects in the vicinity of the proposed location of the unit and comply with the stipulation of Company Act 2013. A copy of such projects shall be sent to the Commissioner for Industrial Development & Director of industries and Commerce for monitoring.

¶173

5. Others :

¶174

a. The company shall adopt rainwater harvesting, waste water recycling and water conservation techniques. Zero discharge facility should be adopted wherever applicable.

¶175

b. The company shall take all statutory and other necessary clearances from the competent authorities including Govt. of India.

¶176

c. As part of "Ease of Doing Business" Government vide order No. CI 89 SPI 2013, Dated: 20.12.2014 has accorded approval to operationalise e-Udyami Phase II for obtaining various clearances / approvals/licenses etc. through common e-platform for the projects approved through District Level Single Window Clearance Committee (DLSWCC) or State Level Single Window Clearance Committee (SLSWCC) or State High Level Clearance Committee (SHLCC) w.e.f. 01.01.2015.

¶177

d. The approvals / NOCs of following Departments have been covered under Phase II of e-Udyami.

¶178

i. Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board.

¶179

ii. Karnataka Small Scale Industries Development Corporation.

¶180

iii. Karnataka State Pollution Control Board.

¶181

iv. Factories, Boilers, Industrial Safety and Health Department

¶182

v. Industries and Commerce Department

¶183

25

¶184

vi. Town Planning Department and Local Planning Authorities

¶185

vii. Municipal Administration Department

¶186

viii. BESCOM/GESCOM/HESCOM/CESCOM/ MESCOM

¶187

ix. Karnataka State Fire and Emergency Services Department

¶188

x. Water Resources Department

¶189

e. The login and passwords which are used for filing application through e-Udyami Phase I are also applicable for filing application through e-Udyami Phase II. E-Udyami Phase II web application may be accessed through www.ebizkarnataka.gov.in and online application along with necessary documents may please be filed for any of above Departments' approval/NOCs.

¶190

f. Karnataka Udyog Mitra (KUM) would provide the necessary escort services for the speedy implementation of your project. You are requested to inform the progress made in the implementation of the project every quarter in the proforma.

¶191

This approval is valid for a period of two years from the date of issue of this Government Order.

¶192

By Order and in the name of the Governor of Karnataka,

¶193

Sd/-

¶194

24/7/19.

¶195

(NAGARATHNAMMA.G) Desk Officer (Technical Cell), Commerce & Industries Department.”

¶196

(Emphasis added)

¶197

26

¶198

Therefore, none of the approvals that are granted by the Board as on to-day is in subsistence. They have expired long ago. Though the writ petitions are filed before this Court, there is no interim order granted in any of these cases. Therefore, the approvals stood expired by efflux of time. As observed, the entire rights of these petitioners for approval was dependent upon the rights of M/s P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited. M/s P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited had preferred Writ Petition No.47952 of 2015 connected with Writ Petition No.11510 of 2020. The said writ petitions are dismissed by this Court in terms of its order dated 16-03-2023 by holding as follows:

¶199

The afore-narrated facts, link in the chain of events and the dates are not in dispute and, therefore, not reiterated. The petitioner applies for allotment of 163 acres of land for the purpose of development of an industrial park. The Government of Karnataka promulgates the Karnataka Industries (Facilitation) Act, 2002 and the Rules framed there under. In terms of the said Facilitation Act a State High Level Clearance Committee is constituted under Section 3 thereof. The relevant sections of the Act that need to be noticed read as under:

¶200

“3. State High Level Clearance Committee .- (1) The State Government may by notification constitute a single point clearance committee called on State High Level Clearance Committee under the chairmanship of the Chief

¶201

27

¶202

Minister consisting of such members as may be specified therein.

¶203

(2) The Committee shall examine and consider the proposals received from any entrepreneur relating to any industrial and other projects to be set up in the State, with an investment of rupees five hundred crores and above in each case.

¶204

(3) Member of the Committee shall personally attend the meeting and in case he is unable to attend the meeting, he may depute a senior level officer to attend the meeting with a written authorisation to take appropriate decision in the meeting. 4. Functions of the Committee. - (1) The Committee shall meet at such times and in such places and shall adopt such procedure to transact its business as may be prescribed.

¶205

(2) The Committee shall examine the proposals for setting up any industrial undertakings referred to in sub section (2) of Section 3 and shall take a decision and communicate its decision to the entrepreneur and the concerned departments or authorities within such time as may be prescribed.

¶206

Powers of the Committee .- The Committee shall be the final authority in granting approvals for the projects placed before it. The approvals given by the Committee shall be binding on all the concerned departments or authorities and such departments or authorities, shall issue the required clearances within the stipulated time and subject to compliances by the entrepreneur undertaking of the provisions of the applicable Central or State Acts and the rules made thereunder .

¶207

Powers of the Committee.- The State Level Single Window Clearance Committee shall be the final authority in granting approvals for the projects placed before it. The approvals given by the Committee shall be binding on the departments or authorities concerned and such departments or authorities shall issue the required clearance within the stipulated time subject to compliances by the

¶208

28

¶209

entrepreneurs with the provisions of the applicable Central or State Acts or rules made thereunder.”

¶210

(Emphasis supplied)

¶211

The application of the petitioner was placed before the Facilitation Committee. The Facilitation Committee granted an in-principle approval to the project of the petitioner and recommended to the Board for acquisition of land of 163 acres in Sy.No.25 of Chikkahullur Village. The land had to be acquired and then handed over to the petitioner. The cost of acquisition was calculated at ₹65/- lakhs per acre for 109 acres and at ₹45/- lakhs per acre for the remaining 58 acres. In terms of the said decision to acquire, the Special Land Acquisition Officer of the Board acquires and takes possession of 167 acres of land from the Tahsildar. Therefore, 167 acres of land was acquired for the purpose of allotment by the Board to the petitioner. But the land was not allotted. The petitioner files Writ Petition No.47952 of 2015 before this Court seeking a direction to allot the land. This Court on 06.11.2015 grants an interim order not to consider any other application qua 163 acres of land that was allotted in favour of the petitioner. The said interim order is in force. During the pendency of the aforesaid petition, the petitioner withdraws the request for allotment of 163 acres and instead sought allotment of 50 acres. The said communication reads as follows:

¶212

“P.M. INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED

¶213

Date: 6-06-2019

¶214

To The Managing Director, Karnataka Udyoga Mitra, Khanija Bhavan, Bangalore-560 001.

¶215

Without Prejudice

¶216

Sir,

¶217

Sub: Project proposal to establish integrated Industrial & Warehouse Park, Infrastructure at Sy.No.25, Chikkahullur Village, KasabaHobli, Hoskote Taluk, Bangalore Rural District.

¶218

29

¶219

(Request for considering our case for grant of extension of time for the implementation of the project.)

¶220

--

¶221

You are aware that as per the proceedings of the State High Level Clearance Committee meeting held on 24.05.2010, clearance was granted to our project as per the Government Order No.CI213SPI2010 dated 2-06 2010 read with Corrigendum bearing even number dated 16-07-2010.

¶222

We had filed W.P.No.47952 of 2015 before the Hon’ble high Court of Karnataka seeking a writ of mandamus to allot an extent of 163 acres in Sy.No.25 of Chikkahullaru Village, Kasaba Hobli, Hoskote Taluk.

¶223

3. In view of the passage of time and business considerations, we do not want to lose further time which would adversely affect our interests. We thought of approaching your goodselves, if an amicable settlement could be arrived at out of Court so that if KIADB allots us 50 acres of compact, continuous, free from litigation extent which is not reserved for any other purpose, we would be ready and willing to withdraw our Writ Petition.

¶224

4. We, therefore, request you to consider our case favourably and direct the KIADB to allot 50 acres of land adjoining to the land belongs to the Department of Astrophysics facing towards road SH-82 in our favour as per the sketch enclosed. If the KIADB allots the said extent of 50 acres of land, we will not press for allotment of 163 acres of land.

¶225

Thanking you Yours faithfully, For P M Infrastructure Private Limited .”

¶226

(Emphasis added)

¶227

The communication was that the Committee had cleared the project of the petitioner on 2-06-2010; the writ petition was

¶228

30

¶229

pending consideration and in view of passage of time, the petitioner did not want to lose further time which would adversely affect its interest and, therefore, a request was made to favourably allot 50 acres of land adjoining the land belonging to Astrophysics. If 50 acres is allotted, it was the case of the petitioner that it would not press for allotment of 163 acres of land. Based upon this request the matter was again placed before the Committee. On 14-06-2019 the Committee cleared the proposal of the petitioner for allotment of 50 acres instead of 163 acres and recommended as follows:

¶230

“ Recommendation of 63^rd LAC meeting held on 14.06.2019

¶231

The representatives of the Company appeared before the Committee and explained that they have reduced the extent of land to 50 acres for the reasons explained in the representation as above, but all other project parameters remains the same. They have requested for allotment of 50 acres of land and extension of time by 2 years to implement the project. They have agreed to provide necessary undertaking to KIADB for the same.

¶232

The Committee noted the above and after detailed discussions recommended to SLSWCC for allotment of 50 acres of land for the project at Chikkahullur Village, Hoskote Taluk, Bangalore Rural District and extension of time by 2 years to implement the project.”

¶233

It was a clear case where the petitioner gave up 163 acres and sought allotment of 50 acres. Therefore, the right of the petitioner extinguished insofar as it concerned 163 acres and was yet to be crystallized in the case of 50 acres. The Committee again approved the project of the petitioner and recommended to the Board to allot 50 acres of land. It is in furtherance of the recommendation to allot the land by the Facilitation Committee, the impugned demand notice is issued.

¶234

Prior to issuing of the impugned demand notice, the cost was worked out in favour of the petitioner to be at ₹142.25 lakhs per acre notwithstanding the fact that the sub-Committee under the Facilitation Act had recommended

¶235

31

¶236

at ₹111/- lakhs per acre. The Board owing to the cost of acquisition, development and other charges later revised the amount payable per acre to ₹2/- crores. After the demand was made at ₹2/- crores per acre, the petitioner goes back and seeks to put the clock back by withdrawing the letter dated 6.06.2019 and seeking allotment of 163 acres of land on the ground that the earlier withdrawal was without prejudice to its rights. This was not acceded to by the Board. The situation then emerges is the petitioner lost 163 acres for it withdrawing its request and did not get 50 acres as it did not make payment of ₹2/- crores per acre, but wants to get back to 163 acres request on the ground that it is without prejudice.

¶237

If the petitioner wants 50 acres of land in terms of what is requested and if the Board is willing to allot, it cannot be at the terms when the allotment was initially recommenced in the year 2010. The latest recommendation is on 02-12-2020, 10 years after the initial recommendation, if the petitioner wants to stick to his stand with regard to the earlier allotment 10 years ago and the demand ₹111/- lakhs per acre, 10 years ago, it would not be entitled to allotment by the Board as the KIADB Act, Rules and Regulations all point at one solitary factor that the allottee will have to pay the cost of allotment at the time of allotment.

¶238

15. The contention of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is left with neither 163 acres nor 50 acres and, therefore, the action should be quashed is unacceptable, since the situation is brought out not by the action of the Board but by the act of the petitioner itself who wants to say that it is giving up the claim for 163 acres and sought allotment of 50 acres. On allotment of 50 acres being made, it again changed its stand to contend that it be allotted 163 acres. For allotment of 163 acres or 50 acres, the petitioner as on date, in the passage of 13 years, not made a single rupee of payment is made either in terms of the Government Order or Demand Letter. This is an admitted fact. For 13 years, the petitioner held on to the land that was allotted to him from 2010, initially and from 2015, on the strength of an interim order.

¶239

32

¶240

16. If the petitioner is interested in making payment and securing 50 acres it would be a circumstance altogether different. The petitioner does not even canvas that, but contends it wants the reduced price to be given as is granted to other allottees. The parallel that the learned senior counsel would seek to draw is in the case of Favorich Infra Private Limited is misplaced, as according to the Board, Favourich Infra Private limited was a bulk allottee. In the case of bulk allotment it is always open to the Board to consider reduction of price. The petitioner’s case is not a case of bulk allotment. Even today if the petitioner wants to take the land at ` 2/crores per acre the Board would allot the same. But, the petitioner does not want it at that price. If the narration of the facts and the approbation and the reprobation of the petitioner is noticed, he would not deserve any indulgence at the hands of this Court. Since 2010 the petitioner is contending that it should be allotted at a particular price. The same is not allotted. In 2015 he knocks at the doors of this Court in the companion petition, seeks a direction for allotment. Several proceedings take place during the pendency of the petition. The allotment could not go forward as there was an interim order operating. The petitioner then begins to blow hot and cold, withdrawing the request for 163 acres; placing a request for 50 acres; when 50 acres was allotted, withdrawing the request for cancellation of the request of 163 acres. In all these obfuscatory attitude of the petitioner, not a single rupee goes into the coffers of the Board. Therefore, there is no warrant to entertain these petitions.”

¶241

(Emphasis supplied)

¶242

The right of these petitioners were entirely dependent upon the right of M/s P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited. This Court has held

¶243

33

¶244

that M/s P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited itself did not have any right as it had long extinguished though the petitioner therein had made certain payments towards allotment. The said judgment is tossed before the Division Bench. The Division Bench has passed certain orders. The said orders read as follows:

¶245

Dated 02.05.2023

¶246

“Learned AGA is requested to accept notice for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2. Sri. Kiran V Ron, learned counsel appears for Respondent No.3. Sri B B Patil, learned Panel Counsel is requested to accept notice for Respondent No.4.

¶247

Till next date of hearing, no allotment shall be made in respect of the subject land. Whether this reprieve should continue, shall be considered on the next date of hearing.

¶248

This order shall not be released till after the Office Objections are complied with.”

¶249

(Emphasis supplied)

¶250

Dated 04.03.2024

¶251

“Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Udaya Holla appears for the appellant and learned Advocate General appears for respondents No.1 and 2-State.

¶252

Stand over to 21.03.2024.

¶253

Interim order earlier passed by the Court shall continue till the next date of hearing.”

¶254

34

¶255

Dated 21.03.2024

¶256

“Stand over to 03.06.2024.

¶257

Interim order granted earlier shall continue to operate till the next date of hearing.”

¶258

Dated 03.06.2024

¶259

“Stand over to 10.07.2024.

¶260

Interim order granted earlier shall continue to operate till the next date of hearing.”

¶261

Dated 10.7.2024

¶262

“Stand over to 16.07.2024.

¶263

Interim order granted earlier shall continue to operate till the next date.”

¶264

Dated 16.07.2024

¶265

“Re-notify on 11.09.2024.

¶266

Interim order, if any, shall continue till the next date of hearing.”

¶267

Dated 11.09.2024

¶268

“Learned counsel for the parties shall file their written submissions along with the judgments they want to rely upon.

¶269

Re-notify on 21.10.2024.

¶270

Interim order, if any, to continue till the next date of hearing.”

¶271

Dated 21.10.2024

¶272

“At request, list on 28.10.2024.

¶273

35

¶274

Interim order granted earlier is extended till next date of hearing.”

¶275

Dated 28.10.2024

¶276

“At the request of learned Advocate General Sri.Shashikiran to get instructions with regard to offer made by learned Senior Counsel for the appellant, list on 04.11.2024.

¶277

The proposal of learned Senior Counsel Sri.Udaya Holla is that they would be satisfied if 50 acres of land SUC instead of 160 acres which is available is considered for allotment.

¶278

Interim order granted earlier is extended till the next date of hearing.”

¶279

(Emphasis supplied)

¶280

Dated 05.11.2024

¶281

“Learned senior counsel Sri.Shashikiran Shetty appearing for respondent No.4-KIADB submits that, the matter regarding allotment of 50 acres under SUC to the appellant would be placed before the Board in the next Meeting, which is scheduled to be held either during the last week of November or during the first week of December, 2024.

¶282

Submission of the learned senior counsel is placed on record.

¶283

List this appeal on 09.12.2024.

¶284

Interim order granted earlier is extended till the next date of hearing.”

(Emphasis supplied)

36

Dated 09.12.2024

“Learned senior counsel Sri.K.Shashikiran Shetty appearing on behalf of respondent No.4-KIADB submits that the Board has not met, in view of the fact that they are participating in Global Investors Meet. Further, he submits that, on the next date of Board Meeting, the very subject would be listed and decision would be taken.

¶289

List this appeal during the second week of January, 2025.

¶290

Interim order granted earlier is extended till the next date of hearing.”

¶291

(Emphasis supplied)

¶292

Dated 13.01.2025

¶293

“Mr.K.Shashikiran Shetty, learned Advocate General states that, the decision regarding allotment is yet to be taken by the Board of the KIADB.

¶294

At his request, re-notify on 18.02.2025.

¶295

Interim order if any, to continue till the next date of hearing.”

¶296

(Emphasis supplied)

¶297

The matter is being adjourned from time to time on the score that

¶298

the Board is yet to take a decision on the application of the petitioner therein. What is to be noticed is the writ petitions of M/s P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited, which have been dismissed, notwithstanding certain payments being made towards allotment. Therefore, M/s P.M. Infrastructure Private Limited had some

¶299

37

¶300

semblance of right. The right of these petitioners in the case at hand is inchoate or still born. Therefore, these petitions which have been filed seeking a direction would not merit any consideration.

¶301

In the light of no right of the petitioners being taken away, the petitions lacking any merit, stand rejected.

¶302

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA)

¶303

JUDGE

¶304

nvj CT:SS

M/S Jdv Holdings Private Limited v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Jdv Holdings Private Limited v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Hatelsab Vs State Bank of India

Sri. Veereshkumar Mallappa Topalakatti S/O Mallappa Topalakatti Vs the Government of Karnataka

Shri. Laxmi Vividoddesha Primary Vs the Government of Karnataka

Smt Soumya W/O. Late Suresh Rao Vs Smt Ratnakumari W/O. S. Baburao

Ishwar Chandra Mudegowdar Vs State of Karnataka

Sri H P Ramesh Vs State of Karnataka