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
| 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
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.
The court ruled that executive instructions cannot override statutory rights and that monopolizing trade through G.O. No. 2976 was unlawful and unconstitutional.
Point of law: position which emerges is that in terms of the provisions for under the Act, 1953 and the Rules, 1954 an elaborate mechanism is provided for reservation and assignment of cane areas to ....
Violation of principles of natural justice in the allotment of Kammapuram Firka to the third respondent Sugar Mill
The fixation of sugarcane prices must consider the current year's production costs and not rely on previous seasons' recoveries, ensuring proper stakeholder consultation.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.