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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 19944

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
K S HEMALEKHA
SMT RATHNAMMA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WP 25078/2024



##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:17219 WP No. 25078 of 2024

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

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

WRIT PETITION NO.25078 OF 2024 (APMC)

BETWEEN:

1. SMT. RATHNAMMA W/O SHIVAKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

WARD NO.1, AYYAPPASWAMY ROAD, AMARIKERE, YELAHANKA, BENGALURU - 560 064.

2. SRI K. ASHOK C/O DEVARAJ, S/O HANUMANTHARAYAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, KOLIPURA, B K HALLI POST, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK,

PIN CODE - 560 064.

3. SRI Material on record JAGADEESH S/O MURUGESH, Digitally signed by AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,

MAHALAKSHMI B M NO.557, KALLIBHAVI ROAD, Location: HIGH COURT OF TOWN BAZAAR ROAD, YELAHANKA,

KARNATAKA BENGALURU 560 064.

4. SRI H R RAJAGOPAL S/O RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,

RESIDING AT UTTANAHALLI, JALA POST, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, PIN CODE – 562 157.

5. SRI HARSHAVARDHAN .R S/O RAMAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,

RESIDING AT NO.10/309,

##PAGE2##

- 2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:17219 WP No. 25078 of 2024

HC-KAR

Y C R COMPOUND, YELAHANKA OLD TOWN, BENGALURU - 560 064.

6. SRI SURESH POOJARY S/O SRI KRISHNA POOJARY, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.1133,

WEAVERS STREET, NEAR GANGAMMAGUDI, YELAHANKA OLD TOWN,

BENGALURU NORTH, PIN CODE – 560 054. …PETITIONERS

(BY SMT. SHILPA RANI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF COOPERATION

M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.

2. THE DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURAL MARKETING, NO.16, 2ND RAJABHAVANA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

3. AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE, A P M C MARKET YARD, TUMAKURU ROAD,

YESHAVANTHAPUR, BENGALURU – 560 022.

BY ITS SECRETARY. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI RAO, HCGP FOR R-1 & R-2;

SRI T. SWAROOP, ADVOCATE FOR R-3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER NOS. APMC(BEM)/MALIGE/1679, 1678, 1677, 1676, 1675 AND 1681/2024-25 ALL DATED 14/08/2024 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT COMMITTEE, COPIES OF WHICH ARE PRODUCED AT

ANNEXURES-T, T1 AND T5 RESPECTIVELY AND ETC.

##PAGE3##

- 3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:17219 WP No. 25078 of 2024

HC-KAR

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

ORAL ORDER

The petitioners, who are licensees of shop premises

in APMC yard, call in question the order dated 14.08.2024 passed by respondent No.3-committee, whereby the request for waiver of licence fee for COVID-19 period has been rejected and consequential action has been initiated.

Brief facts:

2. The petitioners were allotted shops on leave

and licence basis through auction under Rule 14 of the Allotment Rules. Initially for 11 months extendable upto maximum of 55 months. During the COVID-19 pandemic, according to the petitioners they could not carry on business effectively and therefore they did not pay the licence fee for the said period. The respondent-committee by resolution dated 02.07.2024 and consequential

##PAGE4##

- 4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:17219 WP No. 25078 of 2024

HC-KAR

endorsement/order dated 14.08.2024 declined waiver,

demanded arrears, and initiated further action.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

the COVID being an extraordinary circumstance licence fee ought to have been waived. The petitioners did not carry on effective business and therefore cannot be saddled with liability. It is submitted that the impugned endorsement and resolution are arbitrary and require reconsideration. It is submitted that substantial compliance pursuant to the interim order is made by the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks reconsideration of the impugned

action in view of the subsequent developments.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent

No.3-committee submits that the allotment is purely contractual and time bound, expiring on completion of 55 months. The petitioners were provided alternative facilities during the COVID pandemic and therefore waiver is not justified. The petitioners are in arrears and cannot seek

##PAGE5##

- 5 -

NC: 2026:KHC:17219 WP

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