(1.) The petitioner company, which is engaged in the business of producing sugar was permitted and granted exemption under Sec. 109 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 to purchase agricultural lands and to establish sugar factory. The land in question measuring 193.25 acres is situated at Kanchgaranahalli, Ramanagar Taluk, Ramanagara District. The petitioner is aggrieved of the action taken by the respondent - State and its authorities more particularly the Deputy Commissioner who issued notice to the petitioner invoking the provisions contained in Sec. 109 (1)(A) stating that the petitioner was required to establish the sugar factory within the time prescribed and the consequences of not establishing such factory within the prescribed period would form a ground to forfeit the land to the Government, without paying compensation.
(2.) Learned Senior Counsel Sri Udaya Holla, appearing for the petitioner company submits that the impugned orders have been passed by the Government at Annexures-AV dtd. 4/7/2020 following the endorsement dtd. 18/4/2020 forfeiting the land in question on the premise that the petitioner did not establish the sugar factory within the prescribed period. However, it is submitted that the petitioner was not given an opportunity to place the material before the Government to show that the sugar factory was established long back in the year 2006. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the petitioner company started crushing sugarcane commencing from 2006 and said activity continued till 2011-12 and therefore the Government could not have cancelled the permission or forfeited the land. Nevertheless, learned Senior Counsel submits that if the impugned orders are set aside and opportunity is given to the petitioner to place the material before the Government, it would suffice.
(3.) In the connected matter in W.P.No.2172/2021, which is filed by the Canara Bank, the Bank is also questioning the very same Government Order on the premise that the petitioner Bank provided financial assistance to the petitioner company and the petitioner company is due to repay the debt to the Bank. Learned counsel would also submit that the lands in question were mortgaged to the Bank and before the impugned orders could be passed by the Government, the Government should have heard the grievance of the Bank.