Dismissed

Lokeshappa v. the Deputy Commissioner (Food)

Karnataka HC16 Feb 2021WP/1083/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged seizure of vehicles and notices requiring bank guarantees under PDS Control Order. Court, considering COVID-19 circumstances, quashed the orders and directed release of vehicles against immovable property sureties within one week.

What did the court decide?

Annexures cited quashed; vehicles to be released by Deputy Commissioner against immovable property sureties within one week.

Lokeshappa Vs the Deputy Commissioner (Food) — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.1083 OF 2021 (GM-PDS)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

LOKESHAPPA

¶9

AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS S/O. SHEKARAPPA RESIDING AT NO.46 KOMMANALU VILLAGE SHIMOGA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 225.

¶10

BHAGYA RAJ

¶11

AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS S/O. ANNAMALAI RESIDING AT NO.64 III CROSS, SHANTHINAGAR SINGANA MANE BHADRA RESERVE PROJECT BHADRAVATI TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 301.

¶12

RIYAZ AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS S/O KASIM HAZI RESIDING AT NO.13/2 II MAIN ROAD KALASIPALYAM NEW EXTENSION BANGALORE-560 002.

¶13

¶14

4.	SADIQ PASHA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS S/O ZULPIKAR RESIDING AT 6^THCROSS TIPPU NAGAR, GOPAL SHIMOGA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 202. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI H.C. SHIVARAMU, ADV.)
AND:
1.	THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (FOOD) SHIMOGA DISTRICT SHIMOGA-577 201.
2.	THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES INFORMAL RATIONING AREA SHIMOGA TOWN SHIMOGA TALUK AND DISTRICT-577 201.
3.	THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES SHIMOGA DISTRICT SHIMOGA-577 201.
4. CONS PROC RESP NOTIC NO.1	THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE THUNGANAGAR POLICE STATION SHIMOGA DISTRICT SHIMOGA-577 201. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, H.C.G.P.) * * * THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE TITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE EEDINGS DATED 14-5-2020 INITIATED BEFORE ONDENT NO.1 VIDE ANNEXURE-D1 AND ALSO QUASH THE ES DATED 29-7-2020 ISSUED ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURES-F, F1, F2 AND F3.

¶15

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

Sri H.C. Shivaramu, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that five vehicles belonging to the petitioners have been seized by respondent No.4-Police in F.I.R. No.157 of 2020 under the provisions of Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Control Order, 2016. Petitioners have filed application under Section 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking release of the vehicles. Office of the Deputy Commissioner has issued notices as per Annexures-F, F1, F2 and F3 calling upon the petitioners to furnish separate bank guarantees. He submitted that petitioners have purchased the vehicles by availing loan and they have not been able to earn their livelihood due to COVID-19 and the vehicles have been seized for last eleven months.

¶19

¶20

Learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondents has argued opposing the petition.

¶21

The vehicles seized are Maruthi vans, Mahindra Bolero jeep, lorry and goods vehicle. These vehicles have been seized about eleven months back and will deteriorate, if kept unused.

¶22

In view of the COVID-19 situation and peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, Annexures-D1, F, F1, F2 and F3 are quashed. The Deputy Commissioner is directed to release the vehicles by taking sureties of the immovable properties within one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. This order shall not be treated as precedent.

¶23

Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed of .

¶24

kvk

¶25

SD/JUDGE

Lokeshappa v. the Deputy Commissioner (Food)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lokeshappa v. the Deputy Commissioner (Food)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr Tallam Nanjunda Satish Vs the Secretary

The Accountant Generals Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Kankalapati Damodhar Vs the Union Bank of India

A.C. Ravi Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Chalapathy Reddy Vs the Commissionr of Police

Mr. Saravanan Palaniappan Vs Union of India