2011 Supreme(Kar) 222

High Court of Karnataka
N. KUMAR & RAVI MALIMATH
Shree Renuka Sugars Limited
Versus
Union Of India Ministry Of Consumer Affairs Food & Public Distribution Department Of Food & Public Distribution, Government Of India & Others
Writ Petition Nos. 64254 of 2010 C/W Writ Petition Nos. WP No.66903-66907 & 66926-66935 of 2010, 66920 of 2010 & 66972-66990 of 2010, 37143 of 2010 (GM-RES)
Decided on: 29-03-2011

Headnote:SUGARCANE (CONTROL) ORDER, 1996 - Statutory recognition to the policy of the Government: [N.Kumar & Ravi Malimath, JJ] Mandate of the provisions of Clauses 6A to 6E - Consequences of non-compliance of the legal requirement as per Clause 6A to 6E - Held, The first step in the establishment of the Sugar Factory is obtaining Distance Certificate as stipulated in Clause 6B. After obtaining a Distance Certificate within 30 days therefrom, and IEM has to be filed. After filing of an IEM and its acknowledgement as per Clause 6C, effective steps have to be taken for implementation of the IEM within two years from the date of IEM. The date of EIM is 08.06.2006. Two years prescribed expires on 08.06.2008. Now, the question for consideration is whether effective steps as contemplated in Explanation 4 to Section 6A has been taken. A company formed for the purpose of setting up of Sugar Factory is entitled to acquire any land whether as a land owner, landlord, tenant or mortgagee in possession or otherwise. Therefore, Section 109 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act provides for exemptions being granted by the Government from the application of Section 79A and 79B. That is the reason why the company applied for such exemption under section 109 and obtained the exemption. But mere obtaining permission to purchase agricultural land does not amount to purchase of agricultural land in the name of the factory. In fact, the aforesaid three sale deeds were registered even without such permission on the ground, for purchase of the said lands Section 81(1)(d) of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act grants exemption. The condition precedent is that application of the said provision on the date of the sale of Sugar Factory should be in existence. The sale deed is dated 30.11.2007. No Sugar Factory had been set up as on that date. Therefore, claiming exemption under Section 81(1)(d) and purchasing the land is clear contravention of the provisions of Sections 79A and 79B of the Act. As is clear from the sale deeds, the land was purchased for purposes of achieving the said object i.e., Research and Seed Formation and further purchaser intended to set up a Sugar Factory at Yadrav. Be that as it may. The material on record does not disclose that Shivashakti Sugars Ltd., had purchased the required land in the name of the factory to set up Sugar Factory at Saundatti Village, the place where they intended to set up a factory as per the IEM. Therefore, the declaration made by them in the prescribed form is incorrect and it cannot be said, in the light of the aforesaid material that the Shivashakti Sugars Ltd., had taken effective steps for purchase of the required land in the name of the factory within two years period prescribed under law from the date of filing of the IEM. - Further, They were under legal obligation under Section 95(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act to obtain permission from the Deputy Commissioner for such diversion of land use. The material on record do not disclose that any application is made under Section 95(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 for such diversion of land use once from agricultural use to industrial use nor any such permission has been granted under the Act by the Deputy Commissioner. No building could be constructed on an agricultural land and no industry can be set-up on agricultural land without such permission from the Deputy Commissioner. The No Objection Certificate granted by the Panchayats did not constitute as permission granted by the Village Panchayats under Sections 64 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1983. Therefore, it is clear that no permission was obtained under Section 64 of the Grama Panchayat Act for erecting a building. For construction of factories permission under Section 66 is a must and for construction of any other building, a permission under Section 64 is a must. Without such permission no construction of factory building is permissible. Absolutely no material has been placed on record to show that any plans were prepared and submitted for consideration and the permission was obtained in writing under Section 7 of the Factories Act, 1948, when no construction of a factory premises could have been taken up by M/s. Shiva Shakthi industry.