SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Kar) 2552

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
S. Sunil Dutt Yadav, Vijaykumar A. Patil, JJ.
Askins Biofuels Private Limited - Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka Through The Commerce And Industries Department – Respondent
Writ Appeal No. 100115 of 2025 (GM-RES)
Decided On : 21-11-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Sri. Anirudha R.R. Nayak, Advocate Sri Neeraj Sastry, Advocate And Sri Shivaraj C. Bellakki, Advocate
For the Respondent:Sri Gangadhar J.M., Aag A/W Sri V.S. Kalasurmath, Aga, Sri Prashant G. Goudar, Advocate, Sri Goutam S. Bharadwaj, Advocate, Sri Ashrith S. Patil, Advocate And Miss. Aditi P. Goudar, Advocate

The court ruled that administrative actions infringing rights must follow principles of natural justice, requiring a hearing before imposing restrictions under the Sugarcane (Control) Order.

Headnote:(A) Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966 - Government Order dated 04.01.2025 prohibited production of lower grade sugar and restricted procurement procedures regarding sugarcane - Clarifications issued by Cane Commissioner stated that jaggery production was exempt from restrictions and clarified rights to procure sugarcane. (Paras 2, 3, 49, 73)

(B) Administrative Law - Principles of natural justice - The court ruled that non-issuance of a hearing before passing restrictive orders violated principles of natural justice, infringing rights under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. (Paras 60, 62)

Facts of the case:
The appellant challenged a Government order, arguing it infringed their rights to produce and procure sugarcane. The respondents contended it was necessary for compliance with the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966 and prior restrictions. (Paras 2-5, 18, 60)

Findings of Court:
The court concluded that the earlier Government orders were beyond legal authority and the appellants were entitled to rely on the clarifications issued by the Cane Commissioner. (Paras 83, 84)

Issues: Main issues addressed included the legitimacy of the Government's authority to impose restrictions and whether the appellants were afforded a proper hearing. (Paras 34, 36, 59)

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for adherence to procedural safeguards in administrative processes, affirming that rights under Article 19 could not be infringed without due process. (Paras 56, 62)

Result: Appeal allowed, orders of Government dated 04.01.2025 set aside, and the clarifications of the Cane Commissioner affirmed.

Table of Content
1. overview of writ appeals and government orders (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
2. consideration of previous complaints and orders (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26)
3. defense arguments by m/s. askins and m/s. brahmanandasagar (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34)
4. counterarguments from m/s. alagawadi and government (Para 36 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 43 , 44)
5. court’s analysis on power and orders under sugarcane regulations (Para 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 60 , 61 , 62)
6. withdrawal of petitions and implications (Para 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 82)
7. final judgment and order issued (Para 83 , 84)

JUDGMENT :

S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV, J.

BRIEF FACTS:-

The present Writ Appeal is filed calling in question the correctness of the order dated 07.02.2025 passed in W.P.No.107316/2024 c/w W.P.No.100295/2025. The appellant No.1 - M/s. Askins Biofuels Private Limited ['hereinafter referred to as 'M/s. Askins'] was petitioner No.1 in W.P.No.100295/2025 and respondent No.5 in W.P.No.107316/2024, while appellant No.2 M/s. Shri Brahmanandasagar Jaggery Industries [hereinafter referred to as 'M/s. Brahmanandasagar'] was petitioner No.2 in W.P.No.100295/2025.

2. W.P.No.100295/2025 was filed calling in question the correctness of the Government Order dated 04.01.2025 issued by the Government of Karnataka, Department of Commerce and Industries, whereby, the Government had imposed a prohibition on the production of lower grade sugar through 'Vacuum Pan Method' and further imposed restriction on production of any other product from sugarcane syrup. The same order further clarified that the production of jaggery from sugarcane syrup by 'M/s. Brahmanandasagar' would however not amount to violation of Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966.

3. The further relief that was sought in the said writ petition was issuance of a direction or declaration holding that the petitioners were free to procure sugarcane to the extent of 5% from the cane allotted area of any Sugar Factory in terms of the practice followed by the State of Karnataka in earmarking 95% of the reserved area to a Sugar Factory.

4. W.P.No.107316/2024 was filed by M/s. Alagawadi Bireshwar Sugars Pvt. Ltd., [hereinafter referred to as 'M/s. Alagawadi'] wherein a direction was sought to the State Government, Commissioner for Cane Development and Directorate of Sugar, and the Deputy Commissioner to implement the order dated 30.05.2023 whereby, the Commissioner for Cane Development and Directorate of Sugar had passed an order restraining 'M/s. Brahmanandasagar' from operating the Power Crusher and crushing of sugarcane at Alagawadi Village and further restraining 'M/s. Brahmanandasagar' from procuring and purchasing sugarcane for crushing in the reserved area.

5. Further direction was sought to the Deputy Commissioner, Belagavi to ensure implementation of the order, while W.P.No.100295/2025 stood dismissed and W.P.No. 107316/2024 was allowed.

6. The relevant facts are that on 20.06.2011, 'M/s.Brahmanandasagar' had obtained an 'Industrial Entrepreneurs Memorandum' (IEM) to establish a Unit for manufacture of jaggery and on 22.11.2021, the IEM was amended to include sugarcane syrup/juice, while, on 05.12.2019, 'M/s. Askins' was granted IEM to establish a standalone distillery at Harugeri Road, Alagawadi Village, Raibagh Taluk, Belagavi District.

7. 'M/s. Alagawadi' had filed W.P.No.100915/2022 against 'M/s. Askins' and ' M/s. Brahmanandasagar' seeking for stopping of the Units. The said Writ Petition came to be disposed of on 15.03.2022, directing the Authorities to consider the representations of all the parties and to pass orders.

8. The Commissioner for Cane Development and Director of Sugar, vide order dated 30.04.2022 had restrained 'M/s.Askins' from procuring sugarcane fuels from 'M/s. Brahmanandasagar'. The said order came to be challenged in W.P.No.101807/2022, which order was set aside on 30.04.2022 and

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top