In the Karnataka High Court, the company submitted that the closure of Bigg Boss Kannada Season 12 studio was arbitrary, and procedurally unfair. It argues the directive lacked specific evidence of pollution and that the facility is residential.
Bengaluru (Karnataka): VELS Studio And Entertainment Private Limited, which hosts Bigg Boss Kannada, has approached the Karnataka High Court against the State Pollution Control Board’s decision to shutdown its studio facility in Bidadi over alleged violations. The company contends that the pollution control board’s decision is capricious, illegal, and lacks proper legal authority or procedural compliance. According to the petition, enforcement of the shutdown directive occurred swiftly on October 7, merely one day after its issuance. The 12th season of Bigg Boss Kannada was abruptly suspended after just nine days, with officials locking down the Bigg Boss house at Jollywood Studio due to violations of rules set by the Revenue and Environment Pollution Control Board. All contestants were asked to leave the premises immediately. All contestants were then relocated overnight to Eagleton Resort.
What Did The Company Argue?
The petitioner said this affected the company’s legally operating studio complex in Ramanagara District’s Bidadi area. They argued that authorities completely ignored fundamental procedural fairness by not providing any chance for the company to present its case before issuing the closure directive. The filing suggests that officials exceeded their legal powers and acted with questionable motives in their sudden attempt to stop ongoing television production work, particularly the filming of the widely-watched reality show. The petition emphasizes that the swift timing of both issuing and implementing the directive, aligned with the show’s launch and broadcast schedule, suggests a calculated effort to intentionally disrupt the company’s legitimate business activities and commercial operations.
The company points out that the closure directive fails to specify crucial information regarding the supposed pollutant, including its characteristics, measured levels, or the mechanisms by which such contamination allegedly occurred. Without these essential details, the petition argues, the directive lacks clarity, appears arbitrary, and provides insufficient justification. Additionally, the petition states that the regulatory body failed to document even basic findings typically required for quasi-judicial decisions, thereby breaching core principles of procedural fairness. According to the company, the premises in question serve exclusively as residential accommodation for programme participants and cannot be classified as an industrial facility or manufacturing plant.