Disposed

M/S Venkateshwara Builders v. Karnataka State Pollution Control Board

Karnataka HC10 Jun 2026WP/14149/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an environmental compensation demand for want of statutory backing. The Board conceded that compensatory charges cannot be imposed absent subordinate legislation incorporating natural justice principles. The impugned demand was set aside with liberty to raise a fresh demand in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Impugned environmental compensation demand dated 14.10.2022 and demand dated 20.02.2023 set aside; liberty to raise fresh demand in accordance with law.

M/S Venkateshwara Builders Vs Karnataka State… — Environment and Pollution | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:27908-DB WP No. 14149 of 2023

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO.14149 OF 2023 (GM-POL)

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

M/S. VENKATESHWARA BUILDERS A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT SURVEY NUMBER 2/1 AND 2/7, KUMBENA AGRAHARA VILLAGE, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER.

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

(BY SRI KUSHAL GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI ABHINAY Y.T., ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD "PARISARA BHAVAN", #49, CHURCH STREET, BENGALURU - 560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY.

¶17

ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER, REGIONAL OFFICE, KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, "NISARGA BHAVAN",

¶18

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:27908-DB WP No. 14149 of 2023

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

III FLOOR, THIMMAIAH ROAD, 7^TH D CROSS SHIVANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560079.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI A. MAHESH CHOWDHARY, ADVOCATE)

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER BEARING NO. PCB 30 INFRA NGT 2022/4722 DATED 14.10.2022 PASSED BY 1^ST RESPONDENT (ANNEXURE - C) AND DEMAND DATED 20.02.2023 BEARING NO.PCB/RO-MDP/SV ELEGANT/NGT/EC NOTICE/2022-23/1616 (ANNEXURE-D) ISSUED BY 2^ND RESPONDENT.

¶25

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶29

For the reasons stated in the applications, I.A.Nos.1/2026

¶30

and 2/2026, the same are allowed. The delay of 483 days in filing the recall application is condoned, and the order dated 12.08.2024 is recalled.

¶31

Mr. A. Mahesh Chowdhary, learned counsel accepts notice

¶32

for the respondents.

¶33

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:27908-DB WP No. 14149 of 2023

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 14.10.2022 passed by respondent No.1 and the demand raised by respondent No.2 dated 20.02.2023, demanding Environmental Compensation of ` 46,12,500/- (Rupees Forty Six Lakhs Twelve Thousand Five Hundred only).

¶36

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there are no statutory provisions for levying the environmental compensation. Therefore, the impugned demand is liable to be set aside. He also refers to the decision of the Supreme Court in Delhi Pollution Control Committee Vs. Lodhi Property Co. Ltd.,¹ to support his contention.

¶37

The learned counsel appearing for the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board [ KSPCB ] states that in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Delhi Pollution Control Committee ( supra ) the compensatory charges would be imposed only after the procedures incorporating the basic principles of natural justice are included in a subordinate legislation. He concedes that, in the absence of a legislation framed in this regard, the compensatory

¶38

1 2025 SCC Online SC 1601

¶39

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:27908-DB WP No. 14149 of 2023

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

charges cannot be imposed. He also states that the process of framing the requisite subordinate legislation is currently underway and the demand, if any, will be enforced only in accordance with such subordinate legislation.

¶42

In view of the aforesaid statement, the impugned demand is set aside. However, it is clarified that it shall be open for the concerned authorities to raise a fresh demand in accordance with law.

¶43

The petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶44

The pending interlocutory application also stands disposed of.

¶45

Sd/(VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶46

Sd/(K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE

¶47

MBM

¶48

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 18

M/S Venkateshwara Builders v. Karnataka State Pollution Control Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Venkateshwara Builders v. Karnataka State Pollution Control Board

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mr. Raveendra Vs Mr. Gurudatta Hegade

Sri Nagaraja K N Vs the Karnataka Power Transmission

Mr. Prabhakaran Kizhakkeveetil Vs Mr. Saju Thomas

Sri Mahesh Rai B v Vs the State of Karnataka

State of Karnataka Vs M/S. Sudhanva Engineers and Builders

State of Karnataka Vs M/S Sudhanva Engineers and Builders