Karnataka High Court
M/S Amith Agro Industries vs The Union Of India on 20 January, 2025
Author: R Devdas
Bench: R Devdas
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:2231
WP No. 12750 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS
WRIT PETITION NO. 12750 OF 2024 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
M/S AMITH AGRO INDUSTRIES
REGD. OFFICE AT NO 147/7,
SRIRAMA ROAD, 2ND BLOCK,
THYAGARAJANAGAR,
BANGALORE 560028
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR,
MR AMITH N S, S/O N R NAIK
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NAIK N R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by
DHARMALINGAM
1. THE UNION OF INDIA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF BY ITS SECRETARY
KARNATAKA
MINISTRY OF FOOD PROCESSING INDUSTRIES,
PANCHSHEEL BHAWAN,
AUGUST KRANTI MAR KHELGAON
NEW DELHI 110049
2. THE CHAIRMAN AND ADDITIONAL SECRETARY
PRADHAN MANTRI KISAN SAMPADA YOJANA
(PMKSY), PANCHSHEEL BHAWAN,
AUGUST KRANTI MAR KHELGAON
NEW DELHI 110049
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:2231
WP No. 12750 of 2024
3. THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE (TC)
PRADHAN MANTRI KISAN SAMPADA YOJANA
(PMKSY), SCRUTINY AND EVALUATION OF
PROPOSALS FROM CREATION EXPANSION FOOD
PROCESSING PRESERVATION CAPACITIES (CEFPC)
PANCHSHEEL BHAWAN,
AUGUST KRANTI MAR KHELGAON
NEW DELHI 110049
4. THE UNDER SECRETARY TO
THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF FOOD PROCESSING INDUSTRIES,
PANCHSHEEL BHAWAN,
AUGUST KRANTI MAR KHELGAON
NEW DELHI 110049
5. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
AND INDUSTRIES, VIKASA SOUDHA,
BENGALUR 560001
6. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE FOFICER
KIADB, KHANIJA BHAVAN
4TH FLOR, EAST WING
RACECOURSE ROAD
BENGALUR 560001
7. THE NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR
SCHEDULED CASTES
5TH FLOOR, LOK NAYAK BHAWAN,
KHAN MARKET, NEW DELHI 110003
8. THE DIRECTOR
SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED
TRIBE COMMISSION, KARNATAKA STATE,
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:2231
WP No. 12750 of 2024
ARAVIND BHAVAN, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU 560001
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. KUMAR M N., ADVOCATE CGSC FOR
R1 TO R4 & R7
SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH., AGA FOR R5
SRI. PRADEEP KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R6
R8 SERVED -UNREPRESENTED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
THE DECLARATION MADE BY R4 THE PETITIONER IS
INELIGIBLE FOR SUBSIDY AMOUNT UNDER THE SCHEME
PRADHAN MANTRI KISAN SAMPADA YOJANA, UNDER THE SUB-
SCHEME CREATION/ EXPANSION OF FOOD PROCESSING THE
PRESERVATION CAPACITIES (CEFPPC) AT SL. NO. 72 ISSUED
IN F. NO. 13011/1/2022-CEFPPC DATED 28/03/2024 WHICH IS
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS
ORAL ORDER
The grievance of the petitioner is that the fourth respondent has declined to grant subsidy to the petitioner under the Scheme Pradhan Mantri Kisan Sampada Yojana. It is contended that the petitioner has been allotted an industrial site in Plot No.743/1 of Harohalli 3rd Phase Industrial Area at the hands of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (for short KIADB). -4-
NC: 2025:KHC:2231 WP No. 12750 of 2024
2. However, although the Scheme gives certain concession to persons belonging to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe category, nevertheless, they are required to show their networth as prescribed under the Scheme. It is contended that the petitioner has submitted Annexure 'F1' issued by a Chartered Accountant which shows that the networth of the petitioner is about Rs.2,79,93,134/-. However, Annexure 'G' is a communication made by respondent No.4 declining to accept the proposal of nearly 127 such applicants on the ground that they are ineligible. The case of the petitioner is considered at Sl.no.72 out of 127 which is shown in the communication.
3. Learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the Union of India and respondent No.4 submits that as rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel for the petitioner at Annexure 'G' is a communication dated 28.03.2024 where 127 such proposals have been rejected as ineligible. The fourth respondent has not acted arbitrarily. It is submitted that -5- NC: 2025:KHC:2231 WP No. 12750 of 2024 although the industrial site has been allotted to the petitioner, nevertheless, the petitioner has only paid 25% of the allotment amount, on the ground that he is a person belonging to Scheduled Caste category. Moreover, the sale has not been confirmed in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, it is submitted that the competent authority has considered only payment of about Rs.20 lakhs at the hands of the petitioner having regard to the concession given by the KIADB for allotment of the industrial site. The petitioner not being the absolute owner of the property, he being only a leaseholder, whatever amount has been paid by the petitioner to the KIADB has been taken into consideration.
4. In that view of the matter, it is submitted that no fault can be found in the impugned communication made by the fourth respondent to the petitioner.
5. Per contra, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has paid nearly Rs.50 lakhs to KIADB. In fact, it is submitted that the petitioner has paid -6- NC: 2025:KHC:2231 WP No. 12750 of 2024 the entire sale consideration/allotment price to the KIADB. It is also submitted that the petitioner has about Rs.30,00,000/- in the Fixed Deposit.
6. If that is the case, the petitioner is permitted to furnish all the said details along with documents to satisfy the fourth respondent regarding the networth of the petitioner. If the petitioner were to resubmit all the documents and satisfy the requirement of the Scheme showing the networth of the petitioner as required under the Scheme, the fourth respondent shall proceed to reconsider and pass necessary orders as expeditiously as possible.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. I.A.No.1/2025 stands disposed of.
Sd/-
(R DEVDAS) JUDGE JT/-
CT: JL